Hyderabad: The Hyderabad HC on Monday directed the AP government to inform it by Thursday whether G. Ramakrishna alias R.K., Central Committee member of the CPI Maoist Group, was alive or killed in the recent encounter.
A division bench comprising Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy and Justice M.S.K. Jaiswal, while dealing with a habeas corpus petition moved by Ms Sirisha, wife of R.K., directed the advocate general of AP to file an affidavit by Thursday informing about the Maoist leader.
The Bench also pointed out that it was a serious issue. The Bench said, “We are not concerned whether he is a Maoist or any other person. We value everybody’s life”.
Mr V. Raghunath, counsel appearing for the petitioner, informed the court that the petitioner’s son Munna was killed in the encounter on October 23, in Malkangiri district of Odisha, and his mutilated body had been thrown on the AP-Odisha border.
He said the conflicting statements made by the DGP of AP on October 25, 26 and 27 about the number killed showed that the encounter was staged.
He said the petitioner strongly believed that her husband was in the custody of the Visakhapat-nam Rural SP as when he had gone missing on October 23, he was with their son. Reacting to the submission, Justice Nagarjuna Reddy said that he had never heard about such a long encounter killing so many people.
Mr Ramesh, special counsel for AP, informed the Bench that the petitioner’s husband was not in police custody.
When the Bench asked him to file the counter, he requested the court for some time as the encounter had taken place on the AP-Odisha border and mobile phones had not been functional in that area. Reacting to the flat denial from the AP counsel that R.K. was not in police custody, Justice Nagarjuna Reddy pointed out that if R.K. had fled from the scene, then he could have somehow sent a message to his people about his whereabouts. The judge said that in such case a habeas petition would not have arisen.
When Mr Ramesh suggested that R.K. must have fled and that owing to the blockade of telephone network in the area, he had been able to contact his people, the judge told him not to underestimate the communication system of the Maoists.
High Court hears AP CM’s counsel
Senior SC counsel Siddhartha Luthra on Monday informed the HC that the law did not permit intervention of a third party during investigation of a crime.
Mr Luthra was arguing before Justice T. Sunil Chowdary on behalf of AP Chief Minister Chandra-babu Naidu in a criminal petition challenging an order passed by the ACB court, ordering a probe into the role of the other alleged accused in the cash-for-vote scam.
The senior counsel contended that YSRC MLA Alla Ramakrishna Reddy had no locus standi in the case to move the Special ACB court and seek a direction to probe the role of the petitioner in the case. Nominated MLA Stephenson and he had no intention to avoid the probe. He added that they were objecting the Special CBI court’s order issued on the complaint of the Opposition MLA.
When the senior counsel said that his arguments were over, the judge posted the case to Monday for arguments of the YSRC MLA’s counsel.
Meanwhile, former Congress MP Undavalli Aruna Kumar appeared before the judge and urged him to allow him to argue as an intervener. Since he was wearing neck bands, the judge told him to remove the bands if he wanted to appear as a party in person. The judge directed the Registry to tag the application of Mr Aruna Kumar with the main petition.
