Hyderabad: The state government, the DGP, the Special Investigation Team (SIT) constituted to probe the alleged bid to purchase BRS MLAs, on Wednesday filed an appeal before the Telangana High Court challenging the order of a High Court single judge who had entrusted the investigation to the CBI, and quashed the SIT.
Objecting to the observations of the single judge who had said that the SIT probe was “biased and unfair,” the appellants said that he had made grave errors in passing the orders.
The petitioners asked how could the judge order the transfer of the investigation to the CBI when the accused had given up the prayer. When the accused had asked for a probe by any third party investigation agency, the single judge could have transferred the case to any agency other than the CBI.
When the Supreme Court had aside the order of the High Court division bench which appointed the single judge to monitor the SIT probe, how could the single judge transfer the case to the CBI by expressing suspicion over the SIT, the appellants asked.
The government and the SIT said that the single judge had viewed the video release by the Chief Minister as leakage of investigation details, biased investigation and prejudice to the accused: How could the single judge come to the conclusion that the SIT had handed over the investigation details.
During the arguments, the SIT had assured the court that it has not released any investigation material to anybody including the Chief Minister. When SIT counsel had said that the de facto complainant P. Rohith Reddy might have handed over the material to the Chief Minister, and where no advocate representing the Chief Minister was there to say that the material received by the Chief Minister was from the authorities, how could the single judge come to the conclusion that the evidence was released by the SIT, they asked.
Objection, Milord
The objections made by the Telangana government and the poachgate Special Investigation Team (SIT):
The single judge oversaw the issue that less than 12 hours of the registration of FIR, BJP had filed a petition for a CBI probe. Subsequently, the accused moved their writ petition on November 11, 2022.
The single judge stayed the investigation by order dated October 29. It was only on November 3 that the Chief Minister held a press conference.
As leader of a regional party in power, fearing the serious threat of destabilisation of his government, the Chief Minister is entitled to do so as a political leader.
The press meeting cannot be a reason for the single judge to hold that investigation was not fair.
The single judge does not take cognizance against the Chief Minister for the press conference.
The judge fails to record that Chief Minister was not made a party respondent therefore the allegation in the writ petition that the case was politically motivated at the instance of the Chief Minister.
The single judge by passing the judgment virtually set aside the entire case and granted reliefs which were not requested in the petitions. The judge quashed the SIT without any prayer, justification or basis.
