Court reserves orders on Dharmana plea

April 26, 2013 12:35 pm | Updated 12:39 pm IST - HYDERABAD:

Roads and Buildings Minister, Dharmana Prasada Rao addressing a press conference at Media Point in Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly premise in Hyderabad. Photo: Nagara Gopal

Roads and Buildings Minister, Dharmana Prasada Rao addressing a press conference at Media Point in Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly premise in Hyderabad. Photo: Nagara Gopal

A Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court led by Justice B. Seshasayana Reddy on Thursday reserved its orders in the petition filed by Dharmana Prasada Rao, Minister for Roads & Buildings and an accused in the illegal assets case against Kadapa MP Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy, challenging the decision of the Principal Special Court for CBI cases on taking cognisance of charges against him.

The Minister moved the High Court after the special court agreed with the CBI argument that there was no need for prior permission of the State government to prosecute the accused Minister since he ceased to be an elected representative with the dissolution of Assembly in 2009.

Besides, he was given a different portfolio after 2009 elections. He held the Revenue portfolio during the 2004-09 period to which the assets case pertains to.

Based on the CBI argument, the special court had taken the charges against the Minister into cognisance. The Minister challenged the special court decision on the ground that the court should have heard him before taking a decision.

CBI’s contention

Counsel for CBI Ashok Bhan submitted to the High Court that as Revenue Minister Mr. Dharmana had misused his official position in the allotment of lands to VANPIC project and he was also impeding the speedy investigation in the case. His actions had resulted in huge loss to the public exchequer.

He argued that government nod for his prosecution was not required since his portfolio was changed. Dharmana’s resignation was not accepted by the government though he had put in papers, he told the court.

When others involved in the case were being prosecuted in the case, there was no need to spare Dharmana, he felt.

Appearing for Dharmana, B. Kumar, appealed that his client continued to be a Minister though his portfolio was changed and the government permission was required to prosecute him.

The judge reserved the orders after hearing both sides.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.