SC Gives Speaker Two Weeks to Decide on BRS MLAs’ Disqualification

Hyderabad:The Supreme Court on Friday gave two weeks to the Telangana Assembly Speaker to decide the remaining disqualification petitions against BRS legislators who had allegedly defected to the Congress and directed the Speaker to file an affidavit on the steps taken to complete the adjudication process.

An apex court bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Augustine George Masih was hearing a writ petition seeking directions on the disqualification and contempt petitions filed over non-compliance with the court’s order dated July 31, by which the Speaker had been granted three months to decide the disqualification pleas against the BRS MLAs.

Senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the Speaker and the State of Telangana, submitted that the Speaker had decided seven disqualification applications. They sought four to six weeks for the remaining three cases, citing the eye surgery to the Speaker and administrative disruptions following the transfer of the Secretary-General of the Assembly. Senior counsel S. Niranjan Reddy appearing for few of the turncoat MLAs requested two weeks to file their submissions.

Senior advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, appearing for BRS working president K.T. Rama Rao and party legislators Padi Kaushik Reddy and K.P. Vivekanand Goud, strongly opposed any further extension. He argued that repeated adjournments would undermine the authority of the court and violate its express directions.

Naidu submitted that the Speaker had earlier assured the court of timely disposal but had continued to delay the proceedings. He pointed out that one of the defected MLAs had contested the Parliament elections on behalf of the Congress and, despite losing, continued to retain the MLA seat stating that he belonged to the BRS. Naidu, calling the matter an “open and shut case” of defection, stated that the Speaker, till now, had not commenced the trial in the case.

The bench expressed serious concern over the delay, observing that sufficient time had been granted earlier on the Speaker’s own assurances. Justice Masih remarked that the Speaker had “not done much” despite repeated indulgence by the court. Refusing to grant four or eight weeks as sought by the Speaker, the Bench directed the Speaker to file an affidavit detailing the steps taken to be filed within two weeks.

During the hearing, the court observed that this was the final opportunity to the Speaker, and any continued inaction would compel it to take appropriate action in accordance with the law. The matter has been posted for further hearing after the submission of the status report.

Phone Tapping Case: SC Extends Protection for Ex-SIB Chief; Slams State’s ‘Insistence’ on Custody

Hyderabad:The Supreme Court on Friday extended the interim protection granted to Special Intelligence Bureau (SIB) former chief T. Prabhakar Rao, prime accused in the alleged phone-tapping case, till March 10, while sharply questioning the state’s insistence on his continued incarceration even though his custodial interrogation had concluded.

A bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan noted that two weeks after the interrogation was completed, nothing remained to keep Rao in jail or under custody. The bench expressed its inclination to make the interim bail granted earlier to Rao “absolute”.

During the hearing of Rao’s anticipatory bail plea, the bench made strong observations against the state’s approach, stating, “We have a feeling that you want him to be in jail till he breaks down…” and "We will not let you use our order beyond what it was meant for.”

The bench did not agree with the state’s request to dismiss the anticipatory bail petition filed by Rao on the ground that the investigation team needed to probe further him to elicit details of the illegal phone-tapping operation and on whose instructions it was carried out. The bench was inclined to close the petition by way of disposing the matter. State counsel repeatedly pointed out that some points to be decided before closing the petition.

Senior advocate Siddharth Luthra, appearing for the Telangana government, urged the court to first decide important questions of law. He argued that an individual declared an absconder and residing abroad could not maintain an anticipatory bail application. Further, he asked how was the anticipatory bail petition maintainable when the person was in custody.

The bench reiterated that custodial interrogation had been permitted and completed . It clarified that Rao’s surrender and custody ordered earlier on December 11 were granted under Article 142 solely to aid the investigation.

The bench emphasised that anticipatory bail would not give the accused complete immunity and that the police were still free to summon Rao for further interrogation if required. Justice Nagarathna remarked that the court was proceeding on legal principles.

Concluding the hearing, the Supreme Court extended Rao’s interim protection until March 10 and scheduled the matter for a detailed hearing on that date, maintaining that no further coercive action should be taken against him in the interim.

Hyderabad Court Grants 2-Day Emergency Parole to Ex-Maoist Gade Innaiah for Mother’s Funeral

Hyderabad:The Fourth Additional Sessions Judge court at Hyderabad on Friday granted two-day emergency parole to Gade Innaiah alias Gade Inna Reddy, former Maoist, to attend conduct the final rites of his mother who died on January 15. The National Investigation Agency (NIA) had arrested Innaiah on December 21 for allegedly making the statements in favor of the Maoists. Following the death of his mother, Innaiah approached the court seeking emergency parole to attend the funeral. Judge J. Vikram gave him 48 hours conditional parole, restricting him to participating in the funeral and to not meet anyone except his father, wife, children and own siblings.