Amravati land scam: Supreme Court Issues Notice Amid allegation of “Regime revenge” Stays Media gag Order by Andhra Pradesh High Court.

(Judicial Quest News Network)

The Supreme Court stayed the gag order passed by Andhra Pradehsh High Court in a matter related to Amravati land scam case (State of Andhra Pradesh v. Dammalapati Srinivas & Or’s

A bench comprising justices Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M R Shah passed the stay order on a special leave petition filed by the State of Andhra Pradesh challenging the interim order passed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court on September 15.

The plea was filed by the YSR Congress Government assailing the gag order passed by APHC in relation to an FIR registered against a former Advocate General of the State. Among others.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for former AG informed the court that when the writ petition was filed, FIR was not registered

“A Judge recused from hearing. Then FIR was registered the matter was monitored before the CJ urgently the hearing was done.” He said.

Appearing for the state government today, Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan submitted that the entire High Court Order was based on a letter sent by the State to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)on March 23 this year. He Said.

“Can a march 23 letter be the base of ancillary reliefs being granted? This is a Writ alleging political malafide… I ask myself is this an anticipatory bail? The probe was also stayed.

Explaining the court thoroughly the Amravati land Scam, Dhavan said that a probe was called for on September 8. A petition challenging the same was filed on September 15.

In the said petition many IA’s were filed praying different reliefs first IA sought the relief that the respondents should not take any coercive measures against the petitioners in the interim without informing or taking leave of any coercive measures against the petitioner in the interim without informing or taking leave of this Hon’ble Court pending disposal of the writ petition.

In Second IA the petitioner sought that High Court direct to the respondents should not continue with any enquire/ investigation against the petition in the interim period without first informing this Hon’ble Court and taking such permission for the same.

In the Third IA petitioner sought that High Court may be please to issue a gagging order to prevent all the media houses including the paper, print social media from publishing any reports pertaining to the case registered against the petitioner by ACB Andhra Pradesh.

Dhavan Proceeded to make submissions against the gag order and contended that the same goes   against the settled principles of the Sahara Judgement. In Sahara V SEBI, the Supreme Court had made it clear that injunctions to uphold a free trail by curbing the freedom of the press could only be given “in cases of real substantial risk of prejudice.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court in its order dated 15-9-2020, by ay of interim relief, it is directed that no coercive steps shall be taken s in furtherance to FIR no. 80/RCO-ACB-GNT/2020 of ACB, Guntur dated 15-9-2020, which has been registered after filing of this writ petition.

Senior Advocate Haris Salve Also appearing for Srinivas, referred to reports of Eenadu newspaper on July 2014, to state that the proposal to set up capital at Amravati was known to public.

Salve further said that the Government was aggrieved by the High Court’s order, instead of approaching the Apex Court.

 The SLP is a vote of no confidence against the high court. If the order was so wrong, they should urge the High Court to vacate the Order. The CM is now making allegations against Chief Justice.

They are getting surrogate to file applications in HC against the stay order. A lady lawyer has filed an Application against the Sept 15 order. Please see what are they up to he said while urging that the High Court being aware of the Local Conditions, be permitted to hear the case after the Government files it reply

This is not the case where your lordships should encourage the state Government which says they don’t have (confidence) in the High Court.” He added.

Rajeev Dhavan Asked the Court “Should such a complaint be investigated at all or not? All the allegations of Malafide true that he was just targeted for being an AG appearing for the CM? I have not come across such a complaint not disclosing any commission of offence. Was there any racketing take place or a series of transactions? Is there something which needs to be investigated? This writ was heard at 6:30 pm for the sake of urgency”

“This is an entire political writ petition against the Chief Minister. Plea is based not on facts, but reliable sources which too are not revealed.”(Senior Advocate  Rajeev Dhavan)

At This point Justice Bhushan Said that the matter needs consideration, and that the Court would issue notice.

After hearing the parties, the Court issued notice in the matter, and stayed the High Court’s Gag Order on reporting of the FIR, the matter will be heard in January next year.

The Jagan Mohan Reddy Government had mounted a challenge against the High Court order, primarily stating that the order came to be passed in relation to an FIR which itself was not questioned.

It is also submitted that only one person moved the High Court seeking relief in terms of protection from coercive action and a bar on media reportage, the order passed by the High Court extends the relief to all the other accused persons as well.

Hon’ble High Court has erred in failing to appreciate that the Respondent, being a prospective accused/suspect at the time of filing of the said Writ Petition, had no right of hearing. In an unprecedented manner, the High Court has erroneously proceeded to hear the Respondent/Accused in the said Writ Petition, which was filed even prior to the registration of the said FIR. It is an admitted fact that the said Writ Petition was filed on 14.09.2020 i.e. a day prior to the registration of FIR, on 15.09.2020 at 9:00 AM, on an apprehension of the Respondent based on the letter dated 23.03.2020 of the Petitioner sent to the Secretary of Government of India, Ministry of personal, public Grievances and pensions. However, as on the date of filing of the said Writ Petition, no FIR had been registered by the Petitioner.

The investigation, it is averred is in the threshold stage, and thus a stay on the same was not warranted. The stay was granted by the High Court just hours after the FIR was registered. To buttress the point, the petitions adds.

“This Hon’ble Court is in a Catena of Judgements, categorically deprecated the practice of granting satay of investigation/refraining the investigating agency from taking any adverse or punitive action against the accused persons while hearing petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1793.”

It is also alleged that the scam in relation to which this order was passe by the High Court names high dignitaries and functionaries of the State. With a stay on the investigation in place, there is an apprehension of destruction of documentary evidence at the hands of the accused persons, influencing or tampering of evidence and witnesses, evasion of the investigation process by the accused persons, the state government claims.

The petition is Drawn by Advocate Mahfooz Nazki