On Thursday, the Andhra Pradesh high court quashed the FIR registered by Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) against former advocate general Dammalapati Srinivas and others in the alleged Amaravati land scam. The high court also allowed Dammalapati and others to claim compensation from the complainant for intimidation and harassment.
Based on a complaint by one K Srinivasa Swamy Reddy, ACB had registered an FIR against Dammalapati, his family members and friends. It alleged that Dammalapati misused his position as additional advocate general by sharing information he was privy to on where the new capital of Andhra Pradesh would come up after bifurcation in 2014, and amassed huge wealth in Amaravati.
It was alleged that Dammalapati purchased landed properties through his family members, relatives and friends in and around Amaravati. ACB also alleged that he cheated farmers by purchasing their lands at throwaway prices before the announcement of capital and the value of same lands increased manifold after declaration of location of the capital.
Dammalapati had challenged the FIR in the high court. In his 63-page judgment, Justice Ch Manavendranath Roy concluded that the prosecution had failed to make out a case under any of the sections in the FIR.
The judge dismissed allegations of insider trading observing that the such sections are applicable only to trading in securities, bonds and other instruments of publicly listed companies.
He also noted that the information on location of the capital was in the public domain and Dammalapati, though a public servant, was not part of the decision-making process on the location of the capital.
Justice Roy also dismissed charges of cheating by observing that when there was no grievance from the sellers, there was no case to make out from a vague complaint from a complete stranger.
The high court had earlier passed an interim order directing the ACB to stop all further proceedings in the case. The state government had challenged the order in the Supreme Court which upheld the interim order.
Following the orders of the Supreme Court, the high court heard the arguments on both sides. Senior counsel Siddharth Luthra argued on behalf of Dammalapati stating that the entire case was foisted with political motives and without any basis. He said the case was a perfect example of ‘regime revenge’.
Arguing on behalf of ACB and the state government, advocate general S Sriram stated that the ACB did not get a chance to investigate deeper because of the court orders. He pleaded to let the inquiry be done according to law to verify all facts.
Source Link
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments