Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court dismissed the quash petition filed by Y.V. Subba Reddy, co-brother of former chief minister Y.S. Rajashekar Reddy, in which he sought quashing the proceedings in the CBI’s chargesheet related to the cases filed for alleged quid pro quo to Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy from 2004 to 2008.
In the 11th chargesheet regarding allotment of AP Housing Board lands to Indu projects and Vasantha Projects by the then government for development projects, the CBI mentioned Subba Reddy as Accused No. 6 as he had benefited in the agreement without any investment.
Subba Reddy approached the court stating that that CBI had arrayed him as accused without evidence and questioned how cases could be lodged against him under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act as he was not in public service.
The High Court rejected his contention and observed that quashing the proceedings against the petitioner was impermissible and the same amounted to an abuse of the process of the court.
The facts of the case are that on 28.02.2005, APHB entered into an agreement with Vasantha Projects for development of Gachibowli Housing Projects and Vasantha Projects was obligated to pay development fee of `45 lakh per acre for the land of 4.29 acres. The fee of Rs 1,93,05, 000 was payable in five equal instalments of Rs 38,61,000 each.
The first instalment was paid by others, who became a shareholder of Vasantha Projects. When the second installment was due, Vasantha Projects sought a loan from Sree Swarna Company, owned by Subba Reddy.
On 09.05.2005, the petitioner’s company credited Rs 11.50 lakh to the account of Vasantha Projects, which on 11.05.2005 paid Rs 38.61 lakh to APHB towards the second instalment. On 17.05.2005, a high powered committee (HPC) had recommended allotment of an additional 15 acres of land to CHIDCO Private Limited without waiting for the feasibility report of the executive engineer.
An MoU between Subba Reddy, Vasantha projects and others was executed on 30.03.2007 and the petitioner became a shareholder of Vasantha Projects. By virtue of the MoU, 50 per cent of the equity shareholding held by Vasantha Projects was transferred to Subba Reddy’s company without making any payment. The shareholding was given to him as he had exercised personal influence of Rajasekhar Reddy.
The investigating officer recorded the statements of 48 witnesses and collected documents in support of the allegations and filed them along with the chargesheet. The MoU also reflected that the petitioner had to Rs 1,05,00,000 to the earlier shareholder of Vasantha Projects upon successful completion of the project.
The same represented the profit which would have been earned by Indu Projects. The amount given by Sree Swarna Company Private Limited was reflected in the balance sheet.
The trial court took cognisance against Subba Reddy for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B and Section 9 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Subba Reddy filed the petition to quash the proceedings on the grounds that neither the documents nor statements of the witnesses showed that he had exercised personal influence with the former chief minister.
