The High Court faulted the police for not serving notices under Section 35 of BNSS in cases where the offences registered against them warrant imprisonment of up to seven years
HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court took a serious note of the practice of trial courts in approving remand of accused persons produced by the police without checking if the rules and procedures were followed, while taking custody of the accused.
The High Court faulted the police for not serving notices under Section 35 of BNSS in cases where the offences registered against them warrant imprisonment of up to seven years.
Picking up such an incident at a trial court, the High Court directed the registrar (vigilance) to take appropriate action against I Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karimnagar, strictly in accordance with law, as the magistrate allowed remand of the accused produced before him, even though offences registered against the accused would attract less than seven years of punishment.
The High Court also directed the superintendent of police, Karimnagar to take appropriate action against the investigating officer in a crime 339/2024 registered at Kothapalli police station in accordance with law.
The crime was registered against one Y. Akhilesh Reddy, who lives in the UK, on the complaint of Medipally Satyam, MLA from Choppadandi. According to the de-facto complainant Satyam, an unknown person called him from a UK number on WhatsApp on September 29, 2024, blackmailed him about personal issues and demanded `20 lakh. He received similar calls the same day but did not take them.
Although no name was mentioned in the complaint copy, nor were specific allegations made on Satyam’s caste, the investigating officer named Akhilesh Reddy as the accused. The police registered a case against the accused under the SC ST Prevention of Atrocities Act.
The investigation officer also booked an extortion case and issuing look out circular against Akhilesh Reddy. The moment he arrived at the Bengaluru airport he was arrested. When he was produced before the magistrate court, he was remanded.
Sriramgiri Sharat Kumar, counsel for the accused, brought to the notice of the court all details pertaining to the issue.
Justice Lakshman faulted the violations made by the investigating officer and the magistrate court at Kothapalli for allowing the remand of the accused.
