SC turns down Andhra Pradesh, not to send T-case back to HC

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, May 4  The Supreme Court on Friday refused to concede the request of the state government to transfer a petition, dealing with violence in the AP High Court premises in September 2010, to the High Court to try it.

A division bench comprising Justices G.S. Singhvi and Ranjana Prakash Desai was hearing a petition filed by P.V Krishnaiah, a practicing advocate of the AP High Court, seeking action against advocates who were involved in vandalism in the High Court premises on September 2010. It was also hearing a contempt case filed by A. Jayaprakash, former TD MLA, of Vijayawada.

The petitions referred the chaos on September 15, 16 and 17, 2010, in the AP High Court premises, during a boycott call given by the Telangana Advocates Joint Action Committee.

When the petitions came up for hearing, Venkata Ramani, senior counsel for the AP government, urged the apex court to transfer the case to the AP High Court, which has initiated a suo motu contempt case against the advocates. The police also registered cases against the advocates involved in the vandalism.

The bench refused to transfer the case and pointed out that it was a serious case where the apex court has to deal the issue in-depth, with regard to lawyers indulging in such “illegal” activities, at the very place from where they earn their bread and butter.

The bench also expressed its dismay at the advocates turning the court premises into a dais to express their feelings. The bench posted the case to August 2.

HC relief for Dharmana Prasad Rao

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, April 30 : The AP High Court on Monday granted respite to roads and buildings minister Dharmana Prasad Rao by suspending an order of the special court for CBI cases which took cognisance of the corruption charges against him without sanction from the government.

The judge said that the investigating agency has to take government sanction to prosecute the petitioner.

The CBI had filed a chargesheet on August 13 last year naming the minister as Accused No. 5 in the illegal investments case of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy.

Mr Prasada Rao was accused of allotting land to the Vanpic project by flouting norms. The CBI court had passed an order on September 13 last, ruling that sanction from the government was necessary before taking cognisance of offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act against the minister.

But the same court modified its order on January 21 this year, following a memo moved by the CBI contending that sanction from the state government was not necessary to prosecute the minister.

CBI may need state nod to quiz Dharmana now

Roads and buildings minister Dharmana Prasad Rao moved a criminal revision petition before the HC contending that the special CBI court had no power to review its own order.

Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy allowed the plea of the minister by finding that the special court has no power to review its earlier order under Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The judge ruled that “once the order, may be a judgement or a final order, was signed by the court while disposing of a case, it becomes functus officio (having discharged its duty). The order passed by the lower court on January 21, 2013 cannot be sustained in law.”

The judge said that the order passed by the special court on September 13, was valid and the investigating agency has to take government sanction to prosecute the petitioner.

The CBI must now either again request the government for sanction to prosecute Mr Prasada Rao or again move the HC against the order.

The CBI has filed a chargesheet against Ms Sabita Indra Reddy, home minister, on April 8, citing her as accused No 4 in the illegal investments case.

The CBI charged her with allotting limestone mines in contravention of the rules when she was mines and geology minister in the Y.S. Rajasekhar Reddy regime.

Sham marriages shame Hyderabad

Islam describes it as ‘haram’

S.A Ishaqui | DC

Hyderabad: “There is no sanction in Islam for contract marriages and temporary marriages too are forbidden,” Mufti Omar Abedeen Qasmi Madni, an eminent city based Islamic scholar has said. Marriage in Islam, according to him, is a ‘strong binding contract based on the willingness of both partners to live together permanently.’

“Temporary marriages were allowed in Islam, but later they were forbidden by Prophet Mohammed,” says Madni. Citing a recent incident in which an old couple in the old city sold their daughter to a foreigner, eminent Islamic scholar Asif-uddin Muhammed said such a practice had ended long ago. Such an incident happening in this age is quite shocking,” said the scholar who is also president of the Islamic Academy for Comparative Religion. He opined that the problem has its root not in poverty but in the people’s ignorance of the Islamic traditions or their contemptuous attitude to Islam that prohibits dowry.

According to Madni, four important schools of thought in Islam — Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali and Maliki — are unanimous that Prophet Mohammed declared contract marriages as ‘haram’ in Islam.

CCTVs made must for theatres

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad,April 27: The AP High Court had ordered the government to constitute a committee and suggest factors while fixing film ticket rates. Based on the committee’s recommendations, the state government has classified theatres into five categories.

Theatres in Greater Hyderabad fall in grade 1, and those in municipal corporations, including Vijayawada and Visakhapatnam, fall in grade 2. Selection grade, special grade and first-grade municipalities come under grade 3. Second-grade municipalities and third grade municipalities come under grade 4, followed by nagar panchayats and gram panchayats in grade 5.

Theatres have been asked to install night vision cameras at the box office to film the buyers during late evening hours, with the CCTV system to be maintained without interruption. Theatres should make emergency evacuation plans and get these approved by the licensing authority. A documentary should be screened during every show for educating the cinegoers on the exits, emergency escape routes.

Old theatres, constructed prior to 2005, have to set up additional facilities in the next three months whereafter they will become eligible to charge the enhanced rates. Three months is also the allotted time by which theatres shall follow revised fire safety measures failing which they shall charge only prerevised rates.

Orders on Dharmana reserved

By S A Ishaqui

Hyderabad, April 26: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Thursday reserved its order to Monday on a plea by roads and buildings minister Dharmana Prasad Rao challenging an order passed by the special CBI court taking cognisance of a chargesheet filed against him for the offences allegedly committed under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The special court on January 21, passed the order considering the plea of the CBI that there was no need for prior permission of the state government to prosecute the accused minister. The CBI filed the chargesheet against the minister in illegal investments case of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy for allotting the lands to the Vanpic project in the capacity of revenue minister. 

Opposing the plea of the minister, senior counsel Ashok Bhan appearing for the CBI argued that the CBI court held that the office held by the minister at the time of offence was different from the office he held at the time of taking cognisance of the offence, and hence there was no need for sanction of prosecution by the government against the accused minister. He alleged that the minister had abused the power in Vanpic case.

Mr B. Kumar, senior counsel from Chennai arguing the case for the minister contended that Section 362 of CrPC bars any criminal court from reviewing or modifying an order passed by it earlier. He said that the trial court had first concluded that sanction was a necessary precursor to taking of cognisance of offences under the PC Act, but the same court modified the order unilaterally without giving the accused an opportunity of being heard.

After hearing the arguments, Justice B Seshasayana Reddy said that the order will be pronounced on Monday.

‘Prohibition must in Tirupati’

A Division Bench comprising acting Chief Justice N.V. Ramana and Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar of the AP High Court on Thursday asked counsel for the government to clarify the stand of the government on why prohibition was not being imposed in Tirupati by Monday.

The Bench was dealing with the PIL by Bhumana Abhinay Reddy, a social worker and son of Tirupati MLA B. Karunakar Reddy stating that the sanctity of Tirumala and Tirupati was violated due to ever increasing number of wine shops and bars, including belt shops, in the pilgrim centre.

The Bench enquired with government counsel N. Sreedhar Reddy as to what was the policy of the government with regard to allowing liquor sales in Tirupati. Meanwhile, several owners of bars and restaurants and many individuals moved the HC to implead them as the parties to the petition. They opposed the PIL seeking prohibition.