Hyderabad High Court rulings give hope to officials in Jagan Mohan Reddy case

Hyderabad: Consistent rulings of the Hyderabad High Court in cases pertaining to involvement of senior government servants, more particularly civil service officers, in corruption cases or in other offences, has raised the hopes of the IAS officers charged in the illegal investments case of Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy, of getting a clean chit.

The High Court has already given a clean chit to Ms Ratna Prabha, IAS, by quashing criminal proceedings initiated against her by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

The Supreme Court concurred with the findings of the High Court in the Ratna Prabha case, that discharging government functions does not come under the ambit of criminal breach of trust or cheating.

The CBI in its charge sheet against Ms Ratna Prabha alleged that she had extended undue favours to Indu Tech Pvt Ltd in allotting land when she was secretary to the IT and communication depa-rtment during the regime of Y.S. Rajasekhar Reddy.

She was charged under IPC Sections 120 (B) (criminal conspiracy), 409 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) and also Sections 9, 11, 12, 13(2) r/w. Section 13(1)(c) & (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

Ms Prabha challenged the special court’s order in the High Court contending that she had discharged her duties after duly following the instructions of the government under Article 311 of the Constitution and also the Business Rules and the Secretariat Instructions.

Accepting her plea, the High Court quashed the charges holding that they were baseless and that there was no prima facie case made against her.

The High Court noted that the signatures of the chief secretary were very much available on the note file and in fact the petitioner had forwarded the note file before the Cabinet after incorporating the notes of the finance department.

The High Court said that the petitioner could not be found at fault, as it was the duty of the government either to approve or disapprove of a decision placed before it in due process.

The CBI has charged eight IAS officers — B.P. Acharya, Manmohan Singh, Y. Srilakshmi, M. Samuel, Aditya Nath Das, K. Ratna Prabha and B. Sam Bob in the case involving Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy.

The High Court had stayed criminal proceedings against Mr Sam Bob pending before the special CBI court of the city

The CBI named Sam Bob, the then principal secretary (industries and commerce department), as an accused with regard to the memorandum of agr-eement (MoA) signed with Lepakshi Knowledge Hub. The HC also granted stay on all further proceedings pending against IAS officer B.P. Acharya.

The CBI charged Mr Acharya as an accused in three cases of allotting lands to Hetero, Aurbindo Pharma and Trident Life Sciences, by allegedly entering into a criminal conspiracy with other accused in the case to extend undue favours to the companies.

Adityanath Das has also got interim relief from the High Court. The CBI has charged Mr Das with extending undue favours to India Cements by allotting water to its cement plants in Ranga Reddy and Krishna districts from the Kagna and Krishna rivers when he was principal secretary to the irrigation department of erstwhile Andhra Pradesh.

High-profile accused
Most IAS officials who cleared business deals were named as accused in the y.s. jaganmohan reddy illegal investments case. the officials, however, claim that they had merely followed the orders.
K. Ratna Prabha
Charges of extending favours to Indu Tech Pvt Ltd in allotting land when she was secretary to IT and Communication department during Y.S. Rajasekhar Reddy regime.

B.P. Acharya
Accused in three cases of allotting lands to Hetero, Aurbindo Pharma and Trident Life Sciences, by allegedly entering into a criminal conspiracy with other accused in the case to extend undue favours to the companies.

Sam bob
Accused in regard to the Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) signed with Lepakshi Knowledge Hub, when he was the then Principal Secretary (Industries and Commerce Department)

Adityanath Das
Charged with extending undue favours to India Cements by allotting water to its cement plants in Ranga Reddy and Krishna districts from the Kagna and Krishna rivers when he was principal secretary to the irrigation department of erstwhile AP.

Y. Srilakshmi
Charged with flouting norms in granting mining leases to Obulapuram Mining Corp. in Anantapur district owned by Gali Janardhan Reddy when Y.S. Rajasekhar Reddy was the chief minister of united AP. She came out on bail in October 2012.

More details of the case

• The order of the high court in Ratna Prabha and another recent order of the High Court in a disproportionate assets case against J G Murali, an IPS officer, have came as a shot in the arm of senior bureaucrats facing charges in the alleged quid-pro-quo saga of Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy.
• The high court held in Murali's case that once the government has refused sanction, continuation of the case even after his retirement would amount to abuse of the process of law.
• M Samuel and Busi Sam Bob, IAS officers, have retired from service. Other officers who were shown as accused are continuing in service.
• Sivaraju Srinivas, counsel for Mr B Sam Bob, said that both state and Central governments have refused sanction for prosecution of his client and the Centre in its refusal letter to the CBI said the petitioner has not violated any business rules.

CBI filed cases against IAS officials in hurry: Lawyers
Advocates, who have been fighting the cases on behalf of the IAS officers, have alleged that the CBI has not examined the real culpability of the officer and his involvement in the alleged offence, and did not scrutinise the records and procedure followed by the officers in forwarding the files related to allotments to the CMO.

They said that the CBI, which has registered the FIR on August 17, 2011, following a direction from the High Court, did not name any of the officers and it arrayed unknown public servants of the state government as accused.

According to T. Praduymna Kumar Reddy, the counsel for B.P. Acharya, “Even before naming the officers as accused in the case, the charge against his client was that he ent-ered into a criminal conspiracy with Hetero Pharma, Aurbindo Pharma and Trident Life Sciences, by alienating land to them in his capacity of vice-chairman and managing director of AP Industrial Development Corporation, for Rs 7 lakh per acre in Jadcherla SEZ at Mahabubnagar, though the committee had recommended Rs 15 lakh per acre.”

He said the CBI did not bother to verify the rules that govern SEZs, and which allow for the lease of land that is not for sale. It is surprising that the CBI forgot this crucial fact while charging the petitioner. discrepancy seems to be in the amount not the lease.

T Niranjan Reddy, senior counsel for Adityanath Das, said that the CBI has ignored the crucial fact that there was permission from the Interstate Water Regulating Council for allotment of waters to India Cements and by doing so Mr Das was not contravening any law.

He said that the action of the CBI court in taking cognizance of the charge sheet filed by the CBI against his client without sanction from the government was against the law.

Sivaraju Srinivas, counsel for Mr B Sam Bob, said that as per Section 197 of the CrPC, sanction from the state government is required to prosecute a government servant and a sanction from the Union government is required to prosecute an All India Ser-vice Officer for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The lawyer said both the governments have refused sanction to CBI for the prosecution of officials.