Indu Projects managing director I. Shyam Prasad Reddy and retired IAS officer B.P. Acharya, who were made accused in the disproportionate assets case involving Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy by the CBI, on Monday withdrew the petitions they had filed in Telangana High Court seeking quashing of the CBI cases against them.
Earlier, Dalmia Cements managing director Puneeth Dalmia, who was also facing CBI case in the same disproportionate assets case, withdrew his petition seeking a direction to quash the CBI case against him. The petition was withdrawn after his counsel presented arguments for two days in the case.
Justice Ujjal Bhuyan permitted withdrawal of the petitions filed by Mr. Reddy and Mr. Acharya after hearing contentions of their respective counsels. CBI counsel K. Surender, however, opposed withdrawal of the petitions by the accused. He contended that the petitioners, who were accused of investing in companies connected to Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy for securing favours from the latter’s father Y.S. Rajasheker Reddy (who was then CM of undivided Andhra Pradesh), got orders staying trial of the cases by moving the HC. He said the accused might resort to litigation again by filing petitions in the CBI special court which is to conduct trial in CBI cases. He requested the court to ensure that any petitions likely to be filed by the accused be disposed of in time-bound manner.
In a separate petition filed by V.D. Rajagopal, another accused in the CBI case connected to the disproportionate assets case, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan reserved orders. Mr. Rajagopal’s counsel Jayasri contended that the Central government amended Prevention of Corruption Act in 2018.
As per that amendment, permission of the government is mandatory to prosecute a retired government officer, which was not so earlier. The CBI special court took cognizance of the charge-sheet filed by the CBI against Mr. Rajagopal in 2020. Hence, as per the amendment to the Act, CBI should have secured government permission to prosecute him, the lawyer argued.
CBI counsel K. Surender said the petitioner approached the HC with near similar contentions in Obulapuram mining case earlier and his plea was rejected. Since the plea was filed with same grounds again, it amounts to review petition. He contended that the HC had no power to review plea.
Published - December 20, 2021 11:47 pm IST
