Murder Of Ex-CM’s Brother| It Is For CBI To Tell Whether Custody Is Required Or Not: SC Adjourns Plea Against Bail Granted To Y.S. Avinash Reddy
|The Supreme Court today adjourned to June 19, 2023, the Special Leave Petition filed by the daughter of late MP Y S Vivekananda Reddy challenging the order of the Telangana High Court order granting anticipatory bail to YSR Congress Party MP Y S Avinash Reddy in the case relating to the murder of the parliamentarian.
The Vacation Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah directed that "As prayed, list on 19th June 2023. Permission granted to file additional documents." As the bench led by Justice Nath spoke against the practice of Senior Advocates mentioning and arguing cases during vacations, the Petitioner Dr. Suneetha Narreddy appeared in person.
Narredy was being represented by the Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra along with Advocate-on-Record Jesal Wahi.
"May I just sit?" asked Senior Advocate Luthra. "Permission to assist also, to attend the Court is also permitted," replied Justice Nath.
Narredy at the outset submitted that "Milord my father was murdered" to which the Bench replied that "We have gone through the file, the only question we are putting you is what is the urgency to decide this petition during vacation." She submitted that the "Previous order has stated that 30th June is the last date before which the CBI investigation is to be completed and the chargesheet has to be filed before that. In this case, A-8 who is one of the main conspirators in the larger conspiracy did not cooperate and has been given anticipatory bail. CBI had requested custodial interrogation for the completion of the investigation and the custodial interrogation was not done due to the anticipatory bail being given. This Bail should not have been given."
The Bench further remarked that "It is for the investigative agency to take a stand whether interrogation, custody or otherwise is required." They also indicated that the accused is cooperating and the CBI hasn't said that we will be requiring custody. "It is not an ego climb thing that you want him behind the bars," remarked the Bench.
Further, the Bench said, "Let us give you a suggestion because we are not permitting Senior Counsel to argue the matter and you being the Petitioner-in-person, if we dismiss it, the counsel may have some issues and your knowledge of law may not be as effective as your counsel. Take a date in July and your counsel can argue the matter. Otherwise, we are inclined to dismiss the Petition. Let's have it on the reopening day."
On seeing the Senior Advocate Luthra trying to intervene and make submissions, Justice Nath remarked that "Mr. Luthra, you will put us in the trouble of discriminating. Otherwise, 4 senior counsels will attack us. You can stay inside the Court but arguing we are not permitting." He further stated that the matter can be fixed next week, as the other Vacation Benches of the Supreme Court are permitting submissions by the Senior Advocates.
On May 31, 2023, the Vacation Bench of the Telangana High Court granted Anticipatory bail to the Member of Parliament, Y.S. Avinash Reddy. The MP had moved the High Court apprehending his arrest in the case of the murder of his paternal uncle Y.S. Vivekananda Reddy. The High Court while granting the bail stated that the entire case rests upon hearsay evidence and assumptive evidence and that no direct evidence is available against the petitioner to prove his participation in a larger conspiracy.
The Court stated that the CBI tried to rely upon the improved case of the witnesses and the approver. The High Court held that "In the said background, this Court does not find any justification for a custodial interrogation of the petitioner by the CBI authorities and hence, this Court inclines to extend the anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions."
The Supreme Court had on May 23, 2023, directed the Vacation Bench of the Telangana High Court to consider the Anticipatory Bail application of Member of Parliament, Y.S. Avinash Reddy. The Apex Court had expressed its displeasure and observed that the matter was heard for 2 days successively and that some orders should have been passed one way or the other.
Cause Title: Dr. Suneetha Narreddy v. Y.S. Avinash Reddy and Anr. [Diary No. 23669-2023]