Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court on Friday directed the Special Investigation Team constituted by the AP government to conduct de novo (fresh) inquiry into the murder of B. Pharmacy student Ayesha Meera and submit a report by April 20.
A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice J. Uma Devi while disposing of a petition by Prof. Rama S. Melkote and two others said it would keep the petition of Ayesha’s parents Shamshad Beg-um and Iqbal Basha pending so that it could personally mo-nitor the fresh investigation and issue orders if required.
The AP government had constituted the SIT with Visakhapatnam Range DIG Ch. Srikanth, DSPs D. Himavathi and Sri Lakshmi and Nunna police inspector Sah-erunnisa to probe the case. The bench made it clear that none of these officers should be transferred without court’s permission.
The bench told the SIT to inform it if they received any threats or pressures from any corner during the investigation.
It said that the earlier investigation officers had failed to book the culprits, and directed the government to identify the officers and initiate action against them through the apex panel. The bench also directed the state government to provide the logistics and infr-astructure required to the SIT for a speedy probe.
Ayesha was killed in a private hostel in Ibrahimpatnam at Vijayawada on Dece-mber 27, 2007, and police booked one P. Satyam Babu as acc-used. The trial court found him guilty and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
Mr Satyam Babu moved the HC and a division bench on March 31, 2017, declared him innocent and faulted the investigation officers for booking the innocent and making him suffer in jail. The bench directed the AP government to pu-nish the officers resp-onsible for booking an innocent person and failing to prosecute the culprits.
IPC officers face contempt
The Hyderabad HC on Friday admitted a contempt case agai-nst senior IPS officers of AP, former principal secretary, home, Rajeev Trivedi and incumbent A.R. Anuradha, for their alleged failure in implementing the court order for constitution of the State Security Commiss-ion. The constitution was in accordance with the directions of the Supreme Court in Prakash Singh’s case.
Justice A Ramaling-eswara Rao while dealing with a suo moto contempt case noted that though the court had ordered the appearance of Ms Anuradha, she stayed away and instead an application was moved seeking exemption from the appearance on the ground that writ appeals were filed and orders were awaited.
