ADVERTISEMENT

Special Court refuses to discharge Reddy in illegal mining case registered by SIT

July 21, 2019 11:03 pm | Updated 11:03 pm IST - Bengaluru

Says it is distinct from other cases booked by CBI against him

Bengaluru: Mining baron and former Karnataka minister Gali Janardhan Reddy, arrested by the Central Crime Branch in the multi-crore Ponzi scheme case, being taken to a hospital for medical check up in Bengaluru, Sunday, Nov 11, 2018. (PTI Photo)(PTI11_11_2018_000141A)

The Special court constituted to exclusively deal with criminal cases related to MPs and MLAs in Karnataka has declined to discharge former Minister G. Janardhan Reddy and two others from the charge of illegal extraction, transportation and trading of iron ore levelled in the charge sheet filed by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Lokayukta police in 2015.

Ramachandra D. Huddar, judge of the Special Court, passed the order while rejecting the applications for discharge filed by Mr. Reddy, and two of his associates, K.M. Ali Khan and B.V. Srinivasa Reddy.

The SIT, in its charge sheet, had alleged that the three accused had virtually taken over Indian Mines belonging to N. Shaik Sab, who had lease for mining over an extent of 15 hectares of land situated at Siddapura village, NEB Range, Ballari district, and caused a loss of several crores to the State exchequer owing to illegal extraction, transport, and trade.

ADVERTISEMENT

Mr. Reddy and two others had claimed that the allegations levelled in SIT’s charge sheet are the same that are being levelled in the five cases in which the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had filed charge sheets against them, in which they are facing prosecution and they cannot be prosecuted twice for the same alleged offence. It has been claimed that they were falsely implicated in the case.

However, the SIT claimed that the CBI had submitted a charge sheet pertaining to Associated Mining Company, and it does not speak about the extent of illegal extraction and transportation of iron ore from N. Shaik Sab mines, while pointing out that SIT’s charge sheet is distinct.

After going through the material and the statements of witnesses, including that of Mr. Shaik Sab, the Special Court held that there is a

ADVERTISEMENT

prima facie case against the accused at this stage as SIT’s case is distinct from cases booked by the CBI, and they are not entitled for discharge.

ADVERTISEMENT

This is a Premium article available exclusively to our subscribers. To read 250+ such premium articles every month
You have exhausted your free article limit.
Please support quality journalism.
You have exhausted your free article limit.
Please support quality journalism.
The Hindu operates by its editorial values to provide you quality journalism.
This is your last free article.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT