Vijayawada: Two lawyers alleged that the Vijayawada police were not following the procedure in certain cases and getting involved in civil issues unnecessarily.
They produced a case of one Praveen Kumar, who was having a live-in relationship with a woman for sometime. Cases were registered against Kumar following a complaint from a woman who was in a live-in relationship with him.
The lawyers alleged that police of Singhnagar raided the house of Praveen Kumar and threatened him, but that he eventually got bail from the court.
However, police did not accept the argument of the advocates and accused Praveen Kumar. “It is only a ploy to escape from the case by throwing mud on the police,” said ACP Sravani.
The police and the complainant, Sravanti, said Praveen Kumar, who was married had an affair with the latter, and did not tell her about his family. After learning that Kumar was married, Sravanti questioned him and since then, Praveen has been harassing her.
He stole '1 lakh from her father’s bank account online. She complained on him to the police on October 26, 2017 and the police filed a case under sections 506, 509.
Immediately, Praveen surrendered in the court and got bail on November 7, 2017. Later, Kumar tried to abuse Sravanti on the road. He threatened that he would post her videos in social media. Sravanti received fake notices too from him. A case was filed under Section 354D after Sravanti complained about his family.
Defending their action, the police spoke about the track record of advocate Kiran Kumar, who supports Praveen Kumar and even went to the extent of directing him to give fake notices.
Mr Kiran Kumar is involved in the case regarding collection of money towards plots in Jakkampudi Township. He promised the victims a settlement and collected money from the accused, the ACP explained.
The commissioner of police has ruled out the allegations made by the lawyers that caste discrimination was shown in the case and that the cops violated rules in connection with the case.
He said, “This is only to divert the case. They are making false allegations. We are inquiring into the advocate’s role in the whole episode.”
