SC rejects Vijayamma plea against Naidu

SC rejects Vijayamma plea against Naidu

Vijayamma Sought CBI Probe Into Alleged Disproportionate Wealth Of TDP Chief

TIMES NEWS NETWORK

Key Points:

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to step into a murky political rivalry-fuelled litigation culture in Andhra Pradesh and rejected a petition by YS Vijayamma,wife of former chief minister YS Rajasekhara Reddy,seeking a CBI probe into alleged disproportionate assets of Telugu Desam Party leader N Chandrababu Naidu.

Senior advocates Ram Jethmalani and Mukul Rohatgi said the Andhra Pradesh high court,did not hesitate in ordering a CBI probe against Jaganmohan Reddy over his alleged illegal assets following a petition filed by former minister P Shankar Rao and demanded a CBI probe into Naidus disproportionate wealth.However,citing the political rivalry between her and Naidu,the apex court concluded that political battles must not be fought in court and set aside its earlier order for a preliminary investigation into the TDP leaders wealth.

The mother of YSR Congress leader also cited the Supreme Courts decision to order probe into alleged disproportionate assets of Mulayam Singh Yadav despite the PIL being filed by a political rival,Vishwanath Chaturvedi.She said the judiciary must follow a uniform method while ordering probe into alleged disproportionate assets of political leaders.

Jethmalani alleged that the CBI was acting at the behest of the Union government and said the case against Jaganmohan Reddy was strange as the HC took cognizance of a letter written by a Congress MLA,converted into a PIL and ordered a CBI probe.If the HC brushed aside the political rivalry in that case,would it be proper to cite that as a ground to dismiss a PIL against Naidu he asked.

The bench said the HCs decision to dismiss her PIL and the apex courts refusal to entertain appeal against the HC order would come in the way of filing complaint before the statutory authority for registration of FIR on the issue.If they do not entertain the complaint or refuse to register FIR,there were legal remedies available to the petitioner to redress her grievance, the bench said.

Advertisements

24 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

24 responses to “SC rejects Vijayamma plea against Naidu

  1. CVReddy

    http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/cities/hyderabad/ramoji-ambani-deal-under-probe-457

    Ramoji-Ambani deal under probe

    The Enforcement Directorate has begun probing the Rs 2,604-crore deal between media baron Ch Ramoji Rao and oil major Reliance Industries.

    Union minister of state for finance S.S. Palanimanickam wrote to Congress MP Vundavilli Aruna Kumar stating that the ED is “examining the matter” and ob-taining relevant data from the RBI. The probes are at an initial stage, he added. Mr Kumar had earlier submitted a representation to the finance ministry seeking an inquiry by the CBI and the ED into Mr Ramoji Rao’s alleged “involvement in many financial transactions which amount to money laundering,” including the sale of stakes in ETV to Reliance group firms.

    Aruna seeks probe into all Ramoji deals
    Reliance had purchased stakes in ETV channels for Rs 2,604 crore through its subsidiaries Equator Trading Enterprises and Anu Trading Pvt Ltd. RIL had effectively bailed out Mr Ramoji Rao by arranging these funds through Mr Nimesh Kampani – who is facing charges of financial fraud — when the courts had directed the media baron to immediately pay the deposits back to investors of Margadarsi Financiers, which was run in violation of RBI rules.

    Later, Reliance not only acknowledged owning shares in ETV but also sold the same to TV18 network. RIL itself arranged funds to TV18 to buy the ETV shares. Mr Mukesh Ambani’s company had kept the deal with Mr Ramoji Rao a secret till YSR Congress leader Y.S. Vijayalakshmi filed a case against TD chief N. Chandrababu Naidu and made them correspondents. Mr Aruna Kumar questioned how shares were bought at an astronomical price of Rs 5,28,630 each when Mr Ramoji Rao’s companies were incurring losses.

    The Congress MP also wrote to Union information and broadcasting minister Ambika Soni to withdraw licenses and uplink permissions granted to Mr Ramoji Rao. He said that uplinking of ETV channels through TV18 should also not be allowed. Besides the ETV-Reliance deal, Mr Aruna Kumar wanted thorough investigations into Mr Ramoji Rao’s Hindu Undivided Family investing Rs 1,688 crore between November 2, 2007, and January 3, 2008, either as fixed deposits in HDFC Bank or as deposits in mutual funds.

    • CVReddy

      Undavalli Garu,
      Thank you for your fight against Ramoji.
      But your Congress is there to help Ramoji’s supporters.

  2. CVR Murthy

    Given the SC Judgement, How to make best out of it
    1. Let some one present inconsistencies in the Judiciary with particular reference to CBN and YSJ . SC and HC

    2. Submit all these papers to CBI, ACB, ED CVC, Lokayukta, etc . Put pressure through media and other channels on these agencies to Act.

    • CVReddy

      You are right sir

      • NLR

        I agree with Murthy garu . We need to look into alternatives to bring the yellow crooks to justice. They cannot get away all the time using illegal means. Everyone knows that they will lose in the pople’s court but we should not wait till then.

      • TP

        I’m sure in 2014 YSRCP Power lo ki vachina Baabu ni Emi Cheyyalemu!!

        If Jagan wins more than 20MP’s He should support to UPA to get Farmer Minster to AP. If Congress is there Ambani’s will b there..With Ambani Support we cant touch CBN!!

        Babu gaadini meeru antha thakkuvuga anchana Veyyakandi..Vaadu Jithhulu maarina Nakka!!

        CV Reddy Gaaru: I know you are Good Guy, Please stop discussing about in CBN Here..Do not post any comments which are related to Babu.

        2014 lo YSR CP 170 Seats ela gelavalo alochinchandi….

        SHow the Difeerent bew Yello people and Your Party

        Fight for People “PEOPLE”in People court..Do not fight for “CBN” in Supreme Court…

        • NLR

          @ TP

          Babu will be brought to justice. Intha kanna nakkalu dorikaru . Babu’s favourite judges who got the posts under his tenure will not be in their posts forever. There will be sincere people here and there to catch him.
          Just a matter of time.
          I agree with u that we should not get carried away with the fact that YSRCP will come to power in 2014. We need to work harder even in those few seats where there could be a close fight. TDP chapter is closed in AP.

  3. this is the reason in India we need 2 supreme courts , 2 presidents, 2 prime ministers for a better future of Indians one each in north and south Indias undivided physically but politically divided. we can resolve telangana and other new states problem permanently

  4. there is a provision in constitution under article no when in need people can redirect the supreme courts and perform accordingly

  5. supreme,highcourts are already directed by sonia and courts are on a stand by mode where they became idiots in front of people.

  6. kalli

    http://greatandhra.com/viewnews.php?id=39388&cat=1&scat=4
    It won’t serve any purpose…instead we will loose credibility by inviting people like mohan babu….he is of no use…he wants to climb the political ladder by just using our leader jagan….I fully disagree the Mohan babu entry….

    • Sai Prabhakar

      I second it. I am sure like in the past, he may come up with some unnecessary arguments which have to be given explaination by the party. Be as a supporter from outside.

  7. Unfortunately we are in a judicial system where its been influenced by Politicians ( ruling party ) and Media. We really can’t say who is right and who is wrong based on judgement.

    While supreme court judgement looks correct high court judgement on Jagan case based on a letter from Sankar Rao is totally questionable.

    also remember “Reliance” is also part of this case, they will dispose most efficient lawyers who can in front of judges. Ramoji and CBN are taking covers under Reliance.

    Only one place we can get justice is Peoples court. We should keep fighting for poor people who really needs a strong political force to support them otherwise their life will ends up in the hands of TDP corporate culture who mostly follows whatever corporate and world bank says.

    Strong TDP supporters are fighting us personally our victory on them should not be personal ( like in court cases ) that won’t lead us any where. Even if court says CBN is guilty or not guilty for people it doesn’t matter people doesn’t want to vote for TDP ( forget about CBN ) at least in 2014 term, unless we give them(people) a reason to Vote for TDP.

    Out steps should be very careful and we should not get tired or frustrated while fighting for people. YSRCP might be doing small mistakes in terms of handling court cases or one or two incidents via Sakshi and Sakshi TV , that happens we always can’t do 100% perfect job. But our core is to fight for the people which should not be forgotten and YSRCP never did. Recent Dharna in siricilla proves what we are up to.

  8. Indian judiciary is suffering from “Stockholm Syndrome”.

  9. CVReddy

    While quashing the petition, a division bench of the Supreme Court observed that the dismissal of petition against Naidu does not mean that the apex court was giving clean chit to him from the investigations.

    The court directed Vijayamma to lodge a complaint with the CBI, Enforcement Directorate or other investigating agencies seeking justice and Naidu doling out several favours to select corporate houses and amassing of huge wealth.

    INN

  10. CVReddy

    Judiciary must follow a uniform method while ordering probe into alleged disproportionate assets of political leaders.

    We cannot have different yardsticks for different people.

    HC considered Sankar Rao’s letter as PIL and ordered CBI inquiry without considering the political rivalry between Jagan and Congress.

    Sankar Rao also didn’t complain to any investigating authorities ACB, CBI and ED before writing letter to HC.

    But HC ordered an inquiry at the behest of Congress and later Judge Kakroo got plum post as HRC Chairman and his wife as Director in Marri Chenna Reddy Human Resources as quid pro quo.

    Strange, SC dismissed petition stating cases from political rivals should not be considered even though SC itself admitted case from Cong MP against Mulyam Singh Yadav. SC is not following its judgments.

    What an irony?

    Reliance Ambani is great as there is no place he cannot reach.

    Recently Times has published how minutes of meeting of Ministers reaches Ambanis within no time.

    Babu is lucky to have such a man on his side.

    • Karthik

      It’s dangerous that Babu has Ambani on his side. Even a few years after Babu lost power to YSR, he was able to get Ambani to invest in Ramojis group at higher than fair valuations. This is a sign of their relationship because normally any bribing happens as a quid pro quo that is completed simultaneously or within a few weeks. Only in case of a strong on going relationship, people can continue it for years. This might mean that Amabani could sponsor (financially) the nearly bankrupt TDP in 2014.

  11. CVReddy

    న్యూఢిల్లీ, జూలై 23: తెలుగుదేశం అధినేత చంద్రబాబు, ఆయనకు అత్యంత సన్నిహితులైన ఇరవై ముగ్గురు ఆదాయానికి మించి ఆస్తులు సంపాదించారని ఆరోపిస్తూ, ఈ వైనంపై సీబీఐ విచారణ జరిపించాలని కోరుతూ వైఎస్సార్ కాంగ్రెస్ గౌరవాధ్యక్షురాలు విజయమ్మ దాఖలు చేసిన పిటిషన్‌ను సుప్రీం కోర్టు సోమవారం కొట్టివేసింది. జస్టిస్ సిఎస్ ఠాకూర్, జస్టిస్ ఫకీర్ అహ్మద్ ఇబ్రహీం ఖలీపాతో కూడిన బెంచి పిటిషన్‌పై రెండువర్గాల వాదనలు విన్న తరువాత తీర్పు వెలువరించింది.

    అయితే కేసు కొట్టివేసినంత మాత్రాన చంద్రబాబు సహా ఎవరికీ క్లీన్‌చిట్ ఇచ్చినట్టు కాదని, వీరిపై వచ్చిన అభియోగాలను రాష్ట్ర ప్రభుత్వం అధీనంలోని ఎసిబి, పోలీసు శాఖవంటి స్థానిక సంస్థలతో విచారణ జరిపించుకోవాలని బెంచి సూచించింది. స్థానిక విచారణ సంస్థలు న్యాయం చేయటం లేదన్న ఆనుమానం కలిగితే, తిరిగి న్యాయస్థానాన్ని ఆశ్రయించవచ్చని బెంచి సలహా ఇచ్చింది.

    Bhoomi

  12. CVReddy

    ఇలాంటి కేసులలో సుప్రింకోర్టు తీసుకున్న నిర్ణయం సరైనదే అవుతుంది. రాజకీయ వేదికలుగా కోర్టులు ఉండరాదనడం కూడా సరైనదే. కాకపోతే వై.ఎస్.జగన్ వ్యవహారంలో రాష్ట్ర హైకోర్టు ఇచ్చిన తీర్పు కేవలం శంకరరావు రాసిన ఒక లేఖ పైనే ఆధారపడి చేసిందన్న సంగతిని మర్చిపోకూడదు.అంటే అప్పటి న్యాయమూర్తి తప్పు చేశారని సుప్రింకోర్టు భావిస్తున్నదా? లేక ఇంకో రకంగా అనుకుంటున్నదా? కనీసం సిబిఐ ప్రాధమిక నివేదికలో ఏమి ఉన్నదో చెప్పకుండానే హైకోర్టు అప్పట్లో సిబిఐ పూర్తి స్థాయి విచారణకు ఆదేశించిన తీరు విమర్శలకు గురి అయింది.ఆ తర్వాత సిబిఐ కూడా రాజకీయ నాయకులు చెప్పినట్లుగా నడుస్తోందన్న విమర్శలు వస్తున్నాయి. ఈ కారణాల వల్లనే జగన్ కు జనంలో సానుభూతి వచ్చిందన్న అభిప్రాయం ఉంద. హైకోర్టు సజావుగా తీర్పు ఇచ్చినా, సిబిఐ నిష్పక్షపాతంగా విచారణ చేస్తున్నదన్న భావన ప్రజలలో కలిగినా జగన్ కు ఇంత సానుభూతి రాదు. మరి దీనిని సుప్రింకోర్టు గమనించలేదా? ఒక్క హైకోర్టు తీర్పుతో రాష్ట్రంలో పరిశ్రామికవేత్తలు భయపడే పరిస్థితి వచ్చింది. సొంత డబ్బుతో భూములు కొన్ని నిమ్మగడ్డ ప్రసాద్ ను సిబిఐ అరెస్టు చేసిన తీరు సమంజసంగా కనిపించదు. అయినా ఎవరూ ఏమి చేయలేని పరిస్థితిగా మారింది. మొత్తం రాష్ట్రాన్నే గందరగోళంలో నెట్టిన పరిస్థితికి ఏ కోర్టును తప్పు పట్టాలి. రాజకీయ వేదికలుగా కోర్టులు మారరాదన్న అభిప్రాయానికి కోర్టులు కట్టుబడి ఉండగలిగితే మంచిదే.

    http://kommineni.info/articles/dailyarticles/content_20120724_1.php

  13. CVReddy

    A Bench of Justices T.S. Thakur and Ibrahim Kalifullah, however, said it would be open to Ms. Vijayamma to file a proper complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C. before a competent court or authority against Mr. Naidu and others.

    The Bench made it clear that if no action was taken on the complaint, it would be open to her to approach the High Court for a direction to investigate into the complaint. The Bench, while dismissing Ms. Vijayamma’s petition, said that it was not going into the merits of her allegations.

    Senior counsel Ram Jethmalani, appearing for Ms. Vijayamma argued that the High Court had committed an error in dismissing the petition, when it had entertained a similar plea against her son, Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy from an MLA belonging to the TDP.

    The High Court ought not to have discriminated while passing orders and take a stand that the petition was filed by a political rival.

    He said filing a complaint before a competent court would take a long time and the State government would not grant sanction for prosecution and render any assistance in the case. When the High Court at the first instance chose to order a preliminary enquiry, should not have dismissed the petition subsequently, he argued. He wanted the preliminary probe to continue.

    Hindu

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s