National » Andhra Pradesh

Updated: November 10, 2010 03:13 IST

Court ‘no' to Raju plea for time to surrender

J. Venkatesan
print   ·   T  T  
Satyam scam accused B. Ramalinga Raju at the Nampally Criminal Courts in Hyderabad on Monday . Photo by:G. Ramakrishna
Satyam scam accused B. Ramalinga Raju at the Nampally Criminal Courts in Hyderabad on Monday . Photo by:G. Ramakrishna

The Supreme Court has declined to entertain an application filed by B. Ramalinga Raju, founder of Satyam Computer Services, seeking four weeks' time to surrender before court following cancellation of his bail.

A Bench of Justices Dalveer Bhandari and Deepak Verma on October 26 cancelled bail granted by the Andhra Pradesh High Court to Mr. Raju and 5 others — Rama Raju, Vadlamani Srinivas, G. Ramakrishna, D. Venkatapathy Raju and Ch. Srisailam — and directed them to surrender by November 10.

On Tuesday, Mr. Raju sought further time to surrender. Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for him, said the case was based on documentary evidence running into 1,60,000 pages and Mr. Raju needed thorough assistance of counsel during the trial. When Justice Bhandari did not accept the request, counsel pleaded for grant of at least a week's time.

In his application, Mr. Raju said he had been discharged from hospital only recently and that it would take some more time to recover from his illness. The Bench had cancelled bail observing that the respondents-accused were involved in one of the greatest corporate scams of the commercial world. Also the corporate credibility of the nation suffered a serious setback.

The Bench said: “We are deliberately refraining from making a detailed observation regarding the conduct of the respondents-accused because the trial is still pending and we do not want the trial to be prejudiced in any manner.

“Ordinarily we would be slow in cancelling the bail already granted by the High Court, but in the extraordinary facts and circumstances of these cases, we are of the considered view that the impugned orders passed by the High Court granting bail to the respondents cannot be sustained in law.”

If they failed to surrender on or before November 10, “the appellants [CBI] shall take appropriate steps in accordance with law.”






Recent Article in Andhra Pradesh

JD(U) comes down heavily on UDF

Meeting gives clear hints of party moving closer to LDF »