V Hanumantha Rao wants President to be respondent

Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court on Monday took exception to plea of Congress senior leader V. Hanumantha Rao urging the court to make the President of India one of the respondents in his PIL pending for adjudication. The PIL seeks to restrain Prof. Appa Rao Podile from holding charge as the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Hyderabad on the ground of being named as accused No. 1 in a criminal case.

Mr Hanumantha Rao questioned the action of the Central government in permitting Prof. Appa Rao to resume charge and discharge duties as V-C, despite the fact that he is accused No. 1 (A1) in a case registered against him under various sections of the IPC and the SC, ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in suicide case of research scholar Rohith Vemula.

A division bench comprising Justices V. Ramasubramanian and J. Uma Devi, while dealing with the PIL, questioned C. Damodar Reddy, counsel for Mr Hanumantha Rao, on what ground was his client seeking to implead the President as party to this case.

Counsel replied that the as per Section 8 of the Central Universities Act, 2009 Act, the President is the Visitor of the University and has the overall control over the University of Hyderabad, including appointment of the V-C under Section 1 of the Act.

The bench pointed out that in such case, why was the Governor not made a party to the petition since he also discharge duties as the Chancellor of the varsities in his jurisdiction.

Stating the they have to look at what the Hyderabad Central University Act says on the subject, the bench adjourned the case for two weeks, asking counsel to place the relevant Acts before the court. Meanwhile, the bench permitted Ambedkar Students Association of HCU to implead as party to the PIL.

No relief for accused in Musaddilal case
The Hyderabad High Court on Monday refused to quash criminal proceedings against Pawan Agarwal of Balaji Gold and Bullion, who is one of the accused in the Musaddilal Jewellers case. Pawan Agarwal moved the petition alleging that the CCS police falsely implicated him in the case.

Earlier, the CCS police had registered cases against the directors of Musaddilal Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. and others including the petitioner, on a complaint lodged by the Income Tax department for allegedly generating advance cash receipts on the night of November 8, 2016 soon after the demonetisation announcement.

The petitioner contended he cannot be named an accused purely on the basis of confessions of other accused in the case.

TS public prosecutor Pratap Reddy, while objecting to the plea of petitioner, said that the police, after due inquiry, added him as the accused in the case after finding some documentary evidence in terms of transfer of cash between bank accounts of the petitioner and Musaddilal Jewellers.

Justice A. Shankar Narayana, while dismissing the quash petition, pointed out that when the police found certain material against an accused in a criminal case, the police can take the material into consideration to proceed against him.