ACB to probe Yellampalli tenders

By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Feb 27: The principal special judge for Anti-Corruption Bureau cases on Friday directed the ACB director-general to investigate the allegations made against the Chief Minister and others in connection with irregularities in calling tenders for the Yellampalli irrigation project.
The judge, Mr N Sanyasi Rao, was dealing with a criminal complaint filed by Mr V. Srinivas Rao, an advocate. He forwarded the complaint to the ACB with a direction to investigate and report to the court on March 26.
The complainant alleged that the Chief Minister, Dr Y.S. Rajasekhar Reddy, the irrigation minister, Mr Ponnala Lakshmaiah, and irrigation department officials had colluded to obtain undue favour to the joint venture of the IVRC-Navayuga-SEWInfrastructure Ltd during the process of estimates, tenders and execution under the Sripadasagar (Yellampalli) Project.
Mr Srinivas Rao alleged that there was a criminal conspiracy to usurp public funds by inflating tender estimates for the Sripadasagar (Yellampalli) irrigation project.
Mr Kanakamedala Ravindra Kumar, counsel for the complainant, cited directives of the apex court and said that the accused were liable for punishment under IPC and the Prevention of Anti Corruption Act. Mr Kumar is also chief of the Telugu Desam legal cell.
The ACB director-general, Mr R.R. Girish Kumar, said, “We have not received the court orders so far.” He said he will have to examine the orders before going ahead.
The Telugu Desam is expected to use the case to counter the Congress’ campaign that Mr N. Chandrababu Naidu has no right to talk about corruption as he was not allowing an ACB probe into an alleged Rs 500-crore liquor scam.
Mr Naidu has obtained a stay from the Supreme Court on a 2003 complaint in a local court alleging that Mr Naidu and 17 others in the then TD government were involved in paying Rs 500 crore more while procuring liquor for the AP Beverages Corporation between 1997 and 2000.
“We will lose the edge over Mr Naidu if we too obtain a stay,” sources close to the Chief Minister said. Sources said the Chief Minister would allow the law to take its course. His team wants to challenge Mr Naidu to allow a probe into the liquor scam.
The ACB will call for files and take experts’ assistance to verify the genuinness of the complaint. “It is nothing but a full fledged investigation because we should be satisfied with the procedure of awarding the contract first,” a senior ACB official said.
Mr Naidu has faced other cases as well:Last year, Mr G. Janardhan Reddy, chairman of Brahmani Steels and Obulapuram Mining Company, filed a defamation suit against Mr Naidu for certain remarks. Mr Reddy is also a BJP minister in Karnataka. Mr Naidu secured a stay from the AP High Court.
Mr Y.V. Subba Reddy, MD of Sree Swarna Energy Limited, and relative of the Chief Minister, slapped a legal notice for Rs 69.18 crore on Mr Naidu and Dr Nagam Janardhan Reddy, for their protests against his company’s 3-MW power project.

HC notice on stamp duty theft

By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad, Feb 26: The AP High Court on Thursday directed the state government to submit a report on action it has initiated on the alleged large-scale evasion of registration fee and stamp duty by various banking institutions in collusion with the beneficiaries of house loans by concealing real value of the property.
A writ petition brought to the notice of the court stated that hundreds of crores of rupees of stamp duty have been evaded by these institutions and individual by fraudulent methods.
Mr Rakesh Sanghi, a practising advocate, filed the petition stating that the vigilance and enforcement departments conducted an inquiry of these fraudulent transactions based on a complaint submitted by him in 2006.
Mr Bojja Tarakam, senior counsel for the petitioner told a division bench comprising the Chief Justice, Mr Anil R. Dave and Justice Ramesh Ranaganathan that the inquires by the vigilance department established largescale evasion of registration fee and stamp duty.According to the vigilance report, beneficiaries of home loans from various banks have been found evading stamp duty, registration charges, income tax and capital gain tax, thereby causing loss of crores of rupees to the exchequer.
The Chief Justice asked the petitioner’s counsel that the sale agreement is supposed to be registered with the registration department. How can a bank entertain an unregistered sale agreement to extend loan to an applicant, he questioned.
Mr Tarakam told the court that the V&E department recommended he government to take action against persons responsible for such acts.
The petitioner urged the court to direct the CBI to probe into the matter.

HC raps state on Satyam

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Feb. 25: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Wednesday pulled up the state government for the delay in providing financial and logistical support to the CBI team which is probing the Rs 8,000-crore Satyam Computers scandal.
Justice N.V. Ramana was dealing with a petition filed by Mr K.G. Achuthan, representing the Stock Investors’ Hub of Thrissur, seeking a direction to hand over the Satyam investigation to the CBI.
Justice Ramana wanted the CBI counsel, Mr T. Niranjan Reddy, to apprise the court on the progress of the investigation. Mr Reddy, in his reply, complained to the court that the CBI team could not make any progress in the investigation as the government failed to provide accommodation and logistical support.
A visibly annoyed Justice Ramana directed counsel for the home department, Mr K. Ramesh, to get instructions with respect to the compliance of the undertaking given by the home department to the court in the earlier hearing and also the orders passed thereof and posted the matter to be taken up during the post-lunch session.
When the matter was taken up, counsel for the home department produced the letter sent by the principal secretary, home department.According to the letter, the CBI had submitted a proposal asking for a financial assistance of Rs 50 lakh. This apart, the CBI had also identified Dilkhusha Guest House, of the two buildings suggested by the home department, to carry out their investigation.
When Mr Ramesh told the court that the guest house would be handed over by Saturday, Justice Ramana refused to give time and, at one stage, foresaw serious federal issues cropping up in the case and even wanted to issue a notice to the Attorney-General of India to assist the court.
However, after repeated pleas, the Judge relented.Reminding counsel for the home department that the CBI had not come on its own to take up the case, and that it was the state government which gave the consent, Justice Ramana remarked, “Is it proper on our part that if we invite a guest and leave him to fend for himself without providing facilities for his stay?”
The matter was posted to March 2 for further orders after the counsel for the home department gave an undertaking that all facilities will be provided to the CBI by Saturday.

Status quo over NCC’s AP Bhavan project

By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad,Feb. 24: The AP High Court on Tuesday granted status quo on the bank guarantee furnished by Nagarjuna Construction Company Limited for developing the AP International Centre near AP Bhavan in New Delhi.
The NCC consortium had bagged the contract in competitive bidding and entered into an agreement with the infrastructure corporation of the state to build the multi-utility complex in 19 acres adjacent to the AP Bhavan in Delhi. It furnished a Rs 5 crore bank guarantee to complete the agreement and execute the project.

The government issued an order on February 20 to cancel the agreement as the company failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the contract.
The NCC approached the High Court challenging the order. Mr K.B. Sastry, authorised signatory of the company, contended that the grounds referred to by the government were untenable.
He said the company never failed to comply with the conditions and terms of the contract and it was ready to execute the project.
Dealing with the petition Justice Ramana granted interim prayer soughtby the petitioner with regard to the bank guarantee.

HC asks state to assist CBI

By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad,Feb. 20: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Friday directed the state government to provide all assistance to the CBI to probe the multi-crore Satyam fraud. Justice N.V. Ramana gave this direction while dealing with a petition filed by Mr K.G. Achuthan, representing the Stock Investors’ Hub of Thrissur, seeking a direction to hand over the Satyam investigation to the CBI.
Mr K. Ramesh, counsel for the home department, submitted a letter issued by the government that it will extend all possible help and amenities sought by the CBI. He told the court that the government had nominated the principal secretary (home) to coordinate with the CBI.
The court said that if the CBI required more facilities, they should also be provided by the government to enable the agency to complete the investigation quickly.
Mr T. Niranjan Reddy, special public prosecutor of the CBI, submitted that a deputy inspector general or a superintendent would coordinate with the home secretary to get all the facilities.
The court asked him to inform it by next week how much time the CBI needed to complete the probe.

CBI asks HC to get State help

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Feb. 19: The CBI on Thurs-day insisted that the AP High Court direct the state government to provide it with logistical support for its investigation into the Satyam scam.The CBI counsel, Mr T. Niranjan Reddy, told the court that the agency had a difficult time in getting minimum logistic support during its investigations into the Outer Ring Road case.If the go-vernment provides support, the CBI could start its probe into the Satyam scam from Friday, Mr Niranajan Reddy told the court.
He said the CBI requires a platoon of armed police personnel, accommodation, computers, laptops, vehicles and other logistical support.The court was hearing a petition filed by Mr K.G. Achuthan, representing Stock Investors’ Hub, Trissur, seeking a direction to hand over the Satyam investigation to the CBI.
Mr K. Ramesh, counsel for the home department, said the government would extend all possible support to the investigators, and there was no need for any direction in this regard.When the CBI counsel insisted on such a direction, Mr Ramesh said he would return on Friday after getting instructions from the government.
Mr N. Ramachandra Rao, counsel for the petitioner, urged the court to direct the CBI to keep it informed of the progress in its investigation.He cited a judgment of the Supreme Court in Bihar versus the Ranchi Zilla Samata Party, in which the apex court had directed the CBI to inform the Patna High Court of the progress in the probe, apart from the criminal court concerned.
The CBI counsel said the apex court had passed the direction when the Bihar state government had objected to a CBI inquiry in that case. In the Satyam case, the state government had given consent.
Mr A. Rajasekhar Reddy, assistant solicitor-general, informed the court that the Centre had notified on February 16 that the CBI would take up investigation by CBI. He submitted a copy of the notification to the court.

Writ to direct Satyam probe

By s A Ishaqui

Hyderabad ,Feb 18: Mr K.G. Achuthan, financial adviser and power of attorney holder of Stock Investors’ Hub, Trissur, filed a miscellaneous petition in the Andhra Pradesh High Court urging the court to personally supervise the investigation of the Central Bureau of Investigation into the Satyam scam.The petitioner cited a judgment of the Supreme Court in the state of Bihar versus the Ranchi Zilla Samata Party, in which the apex court directed the CBI to inform the progress of the investigation from time to time to the Patna High Court apart from the criminal court concerned

AG refuses to give info on port development pact

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Feb. 16: The advocate-general, Mr C.V. Mohan Reddy, on Monday, refused to furnish documents related to the state government’s agreements with Vodarevu (seaport) Nizampatnam Ports Industrial Complex (Vanpic) to develop ports and other port-based industries between Nizampatnam and Vodarevu in Guntur and Prakasam districts.

The government signed an agreement with Matrix Enport Holdings Private Limited to develop Nizampatnam and Vodarevu ports and the latter had an MoU with Ras-Al-Khaimah (an Emirate of the United Arab Emirates) to develop the corridor between the ports.

Motupalli Port and Industrial Corridor Vythireka Porata Committee challenged the MoU in the AP High Court. It contended that without prior permission from the Centre, the developer cannot enter into an MoU with a foreign investor.

Mr Reddy arguing the case before a division bench comprising Chief Justice Anil R. Dave and Justice Ramesh Ranaganathan said the petitioners are supposed to collect all the relevant material and information before filing a PIL.

The advocate-general recalled the Supreme Court directions in preventing uncalled PILs in recent times. He contended that the petitioner can avail the Right to Information Act to obtain the necessary documents.

HC seeks info on CBI probe

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad,Feb. 17: The AP High Court has sought to know how much time the Central Bureau of Investigation would take to begin its pro-be into the Satyam scam.Justice N.V. Ramana asked the assistant solicitor-general of India, Mr A. Rajasekhar Reddy, to inform him by Thursday when the CBI would take over the case from the crime investigation department.
The court heard a petition filed by Mr K.G. Achuthan, financial adviser and power of attorney holder of Stock Investors’ Hub, Trissur, seeking a direction that the government hand over the investigation to the CBI.
Mr T. Niranajan Reddy, counsel for the CBI, told the court that the CBI had already given its consent to the state government to probe into the scam.

CBI to probe Satyam

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Feb 16: The government on Monday handed over the Satyam scam to the CBI.The government directed the DGP to furnish a self-contained note of the incident and send it to the Centre and the CBI.The government sent the notification to the ministry of personnel, public grievances and pensions, department of personnel.
This was informed to the the AP High Court by Mr K. Ramesh, counsel for the home department during the hearing of a petition filed by Mr K. G. Achuthan, financial adviser and power of attorney holder of stock investors hub, Trissur, seeking a direction that the government hand over investigation to the CBI.

CBI to probe Satyam

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, Feb 16: The government on Monday handed over the Satyam scam to the CBI.The government directed the DGP to furnish a self-contained note of the incident and send it to the Centre and the CBI.

The government sent the notification to the ministry of personnel, public grievances and pensions, department of personnel.

This was informed to the the AP High Court by Mr K. Ramesh, counsel for the home department during the hearing of a petition filed by Mr K. G. Achuthan, financial adviser and power of attorney holder of stock investors hub, Trissur, seeking a direction that the government hand over investigation to the CBI.

Police careful after HC order

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad,Feb. 13: The recent directive of the AP High Court on encounter deaths has effectively barred the police from registering a case under Section 174 CrPC (suspicious death) after such incidents.In its significant verdict, the five member bench of the HC had asked the state government to consider encounter deaths as murders.
This means that police officers would also have to restrain themselves from giving a narrative of the encounter from their own perspective. Neither can they escape from the provisions of law by claiming self-defence at the initial stage of the investigation.
A perusal of the full text of the judgment, available with me , reveals that the bench found fault with the usual practice of the police to register the death under Section 174 of CrPC for the purpose of investigation.“We have recorded the conclusion that an inquest is not for the purpose of ascertaining the perpetrator of an offence,” said the court. “There appears no logical purpose served in enjoining that the case registered under Section 174 CrPC should be made over for investigation to an independent agency.”
The court said the practice now followed in the state was in clear deviance of the National Human Rights Commission guidelines and the provisions of standing orders 546(6) of the AP Police Manual. “It is an extravagant subversion of the rule of law,” the HC said.
The bench also felt that the failure to record and register the primary offence of the death of civilian(s) in an exchange of fire with police officers was a grave and wholly unwarranted transgression of constitutional and sovereign responsibility.
According to the court, the state was legislatively mandated to record and register a cognisable offence and thereafter set the criminal law in motion including immediately launching an investigation into the offence.
“We hold that such information shall be recorded under Section 154 CrPC, a process that ensures judicial control,” said the court.

Court blocks Maytas road

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad,Feb. 13: The AP High Court on Friday stalled the government order awarding a road contract of Rs 120 crore on nomination basis to Maytas Infra Ltd, owned by family of the jailed Satyam foun-der, Mr B. Ramalinga Raju. The directive was issued even as the state Cabinet ratified the order of the roads and buildings department allotting the work to Maytas.
The Chief Minister, Dr Y.S. Rajasekhar Reddy, had earlier defended giving the contract to Maytas by terming it a “cautious and conscious” decision taken after assessing the situation. On December 20, 2008, a fortnight before the Satyam scam erupted, the government had entrusted the construction of a road from Mangapatnam to K. Sugumanchipalli village in Kadapa district to Maytas.
The existing road would get submerged during the construction of a dam. Mr P. Narayana Reddy, sarpanch of the Obannapet village, and two others filed a petition challenging the allotment of work to Maytas. Counsel for the petitioner, Mr P. Veera Reddy, told a division bench comprising Chief Justice Anil R. Dave and Justice Ramesh Ranga-nathan that awarding such huge work on nomination basis to Maytas was illegal. He said that after the Satyam scam, Karnataka, Orissa and Maharashtra had cancelled contracts given to Maytas.
The court directed the government to stay proceedings on the GO. “If the award was not conferred in favour of Maytas don’t confer it,” said the bench. “If conferred, do not proceed further.”

Police: Who will fight terror?

By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad,Feb. 6: “Who will come forward to take part in operations like in the terror attacks in Mumbai,” a police officer asked in the face of the AP High Court ruling that ordered FIRs to be filed on police officials who participate in encounter killings.There were security worries too. “Maoists target officials involved in operations,” an officer said, explaining the rationale of not naming those who take part in operations.“Now if the names are exposed then they will be targeted easily,” an official said. “Vyas and Umesh Chandra were gunned down. Officials become easy targets,” he said.Legal experts say the judgment, which has wide ramifications, will come in force immediately and the government would not be able to request the court to keep it in abeyance till an appeal.The senior criminal lawyer, Mr C. Padmanbha Reddy, amicus curiae in the case, welcomed the verdict and said that from now on any death caused by police action would come under the purview of section 302 of the IPC. Police cannot escape by claiming right of self defence.“I feel that from now on no police officer will resort to fake killings,” Mr Reddy said. “Even a constable will think twice before opening fire on a person on the orders of his superiors.”Mr Bojja Tarakam, another senior counsel, said that it was an amazing verdict after 40 years of struggle by rights organisations.It had retrospective affect and would enable people to ask police to reopen the old cases, he said. Revolutionary writer Varavara Rao said 6,000 Maoists were killed in fake encounters in the state. “We will launch a struggle to reopen most of the cases,” Mr Rao added.

No self-defence for cops: HC

By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad,Feb. 6: Following are the excerpts of the judgment delivered by the Andhra Pradesh High Court on Friday in the encounter deaths’ case.The bench said, “Where a police officer causes the death of a person, acting or purporting to act in discharge of official duties or in self-defence as the case may be, the first information relating to such circumstances (even where by a police/public official, whether an alleged perpetrator is named or not) shall be recorded and registered as an FIR enumerating the relevant provisions of law (Under Sections 154(1) 156 and 157 CRPC) and shall be investigated”.Further, it held that the right of private defence cannot be conclusively determined during investigation. The opinion recorded by the investigation officer (on self-defence) in the final report forwarded to the magistrate (Section 173 CRPC) is only an opinion. “Such opinion shall be considered by the magistrate in the context of the record of the investigation together with the material and evidence collected during the course of investigation. The magistrate (notwithstanding an opinion of the investigating officer …) shall critically examine the entirety of the evidence collected during the investigation to ascertain whether the opinion of the investigation officer is borne out by the record of the investigation.The magistrate has the discretion to disregard the opinion and take cognisance of the offence under Section 190 CRPC.”It added that a magisterial enquiry (inquest) under section 174 to 176 CRPC is neither a substitute nor an alternative to the obligation to record the information as FIR and to conduct investigation into the facts and circumstances of the case and if necessary to take measures for the discovery and arrest of the offender under Section 154(1) and 157 Crpc.The bench pointed out that in view of its declaration (that the information conveyed to the officer in charge of a police station or a complaint made to the magistrate need not mention the name of the police officers who the complaint believes in the perpetrator of the offence) it is not necessary to pronounce on whether the State/the police establishment or a police officer is immune from the obligation to disclose the identity (of a police officer who had committed an act causing death) to a person aggrieved by such death to effectively seek justice.“Whether the investigation officer is required to disclose the name of the police officers who are involved in an operation resulting in civil casualty, when a request for such information is lodged by an individual, is an issue not within the spectrum of the issues falling for our determination herein,” said the HC.However, the court said that the obligation to disclose to the investigation officer the identity of the police officers involved was absolute and there was no immunity whatsoever from this.

APHC muzzles cop guns

By S A Ishaqui
Hyderabad,Feb. 6: In a verdict carrying far-reaching consequences, the AP High Court on Friday ruled that an FIR should be registered against a police officer involved in an encounter, custodial death or any death at police hands.A larger bench ruled that a police officer cannot claim right of self-defence at the investigation level following an encounter.
Till now, the procedure was that police officials involved in an encounter would file a complaint alleging attempt to murder by the other party. If the target died in the encounter, they would claim self-defence. The matter would be closed at the investigation level.
Now, the court wants all the sections of the CrPC that such a case attracts to be mentioned, and investigated. The case has to be decided during the course of trial, said the larger bench headed by Justice Goda Raghuram and comprising Justices V.V.S. Rao, R. Subhash Reddy, Ramesh Rangana-than and G. Bhavani Prasad.
The verdict came on a batch of writ petitions filed by the AP Civil Liberties Committee and relatives of Maoists who were killed in encounters. The petitioners had wanted a direction to register murder cases against police personal participating in encounters.
The issue was earlier dealt with by a three-member bench, but there was a difference of opinion. Justice Bilal Nazki, who headed the bench at that time, opined that a murder case should be registered against police personnel, but the other two judges differed with the opinion. The issue came up before another three-member bench which referred it to the larger bench.
The larger bench on Friday unanimously held that an FIR should be issued according to the information received by a station house officer related to a cognisable offence.The court ruled that “where a police officer causes the death of a person, acting or purporting to act in discharge of official duties or in self-defence as the case may be, the first information relating to such circumstances (even where by a police /public official, whether an alleged perpetrator is named or not) shall be recorded and registered as an FIR enumerating the relevant provisions of law and shall be investigated.”
The court said, “the existence of circumstances bringing a case within any of the exceptions in the Indian Penal Code, 1860, including exercise of the right of private defence cannot be conclusively determined during investigation.”The court held that the final report submitted by the police officer to a magistrate on completion of the investigation is not conclusive. “It is only an opinion. Such opinion shall be considered by the magistrate in the context of the record of the investigation together with the material and evidence collected during the course of investigation”.
It said the magistrate should examine the evidence to ascertain whether the opinion of the investigation officer is borne out by the investigation. The magistrate has the discretion to disregard the opinion and take cognisance to the offence according to law.
The bench unanimously held that a magisterial inquiry (under Section 176 of the CrPC) was neither a substitute nor an alternative to the obligation to record the information as FIR and to conduct investigation.If necessary the inquiry has to take measures for the discovery and arrest of the offender under Sections 154 (1) 156 and 157 of the CrPC.
The sections deal with registering an FIR, receiving information and conducting investigation. The bench could not pronounce its opinion on whether there was an obligation to disclose the identity of a police officer who had caused the death of a person; and if there was an obligation, under what circumstances and contexts. The court said this aspect was left open.