The Supreme Court Wednesday stayed a direction of the Andhra Pradesh High Court gagging the media from reporting a matter related to the Amravati land scam case in which the former Advocate General of the state, Dammalapati Srinivas, and the two daughters of a Supreme Court judge are accused, among others..A three-judge bench led by Justice Ashok Bhushan, however, did not stay the other direction of the High Court staying the investigation into the FIR relating to the case..While issuing notice in a plea filed by the Andhra Pradesh Government against the High Court order, the bench which also consisted of Justices R Subash Reddy and MR Shah ordered-."…directions issued in the impugned order dated 15.09.2020 to the extent of following shall remain stayed.."It is further directed that the news in regard to registration of FIR or in the context of the said FIR shall not be made public in any electronic, print or social media, to foist the office of a former Advocate General and also with respect to the other alleged accused persons.".The top court also asked the High Court not to decide the petition filed by the former Advocate General and listed the appeal for hearing in the last week of January 2021..Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, for the State of AP, argued against the High Court's order and said that the High Court could not have stayed the investigation on the same day of filing the writ petition..Dhavan added that the FIR named 13 persons, whereas the petition before the High Court was only confined to the former AG. The High Court, thus, went beyond the relief sought for, Dhavav contended..With regard to media gag, Dhavan submitted that it went against the settled law laid down by a constitution bench in the Sahara case..Senior advocate Mukul Rohtagi, appearing for the accused former AG, argued that his client was being targeted because he was appearing for the (former) CM..Senior Advocate Harish Salve, also appearing for Srinivas, referred to 'Ee Nadu' reports of July 2014 to state that the proposal to set up a capital at Amravati was known to the public. Salve added that the matter should be referred back to the High Court, and the top court should refuse to interfere at this stage..As per the report published by The Wire, the FIR contains allegations that an advocate, Komatla Srinivasa Swamy Reddy, has alleged that Dammalapati Srinivas, who served as the AG during the N. Chandrababu Naidu regime, had used his influence to first gather information about the capital's plan, and then purchase vast tracts of land in the premium core capital region.."It was alleged in the complaint that some of the public servants in high positions took advantage of their involvement in the decision-making process pertaining to the fixing of the exact location of the core capital area and that such people purchased lands for themselves either through benamidars or through their family members and associates/acquaintances after sharing the privileged information about the core capital area that they were privy to, thereby enriching themselves," the FIR said..Read the Supreme Court's order.http://theleaflet.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/20400_2020_34_9_24837_Order_25-Nov-2020.pdf
The Supreme Court Wednesday stayed a direction of the Andhra Pradesh High Court gagging the media from reporting a matter related to the Amravati land scam case in which the former Advocate General of the state, Dammalapati Srinivas, and the two daughters of a Supreme Court judge are accused, among others..A three-judge bench led by Justice Ashok Bhushan, however, did not stay the other direction of the High Court staying the investigation into the FIR relating to the case..While issuing notice in a plea filed by the Andhra Pradesh Government against the High Court order, the bench which also consisted of Justices R Subash Reddy and MR Shah ordered-."…directions issued in the impugned order dated 15.09.2020 to the extent of following shall remain stayed.."It is further directed that the news in regard to registration of FIR or in the context of the said FIR shall not be made public in any electronic, print or social media, to foist the office of a former Advocate General and also with respect to the other alleged accused persons.".The top court also asked the High Court not to decide the petition filed by the former Advocate General and listed the appeal for hearing in the last week of January 2021..Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, for the State of AP, argued against the High Court's order and said that the High Court could not have stayed the investigation on the same day of filing the writ petition..Dhavan added that the FIR named 13 persons, whereas the petition before the High Court was only confined to the former AG. The High Court, thus, went beyond the relief sought for, Dhavav contended..With regard to media gag, Dhavan submitted that it went against the settled law laid down by a constitution bench in the Sahara case..Senior advocate Mukul Rohtagi, appearing for the accused former AG, argued that his client was being targeted because he was appearing for the (former) CM..Senior Advocate Harish Salve, also appearing for Srinivas, referred to 'Ee Nadu' reports of July 2014 to state that the proposal to set up a capital at Amravati was known to the public. Salve added that the matter should be referred back to the High Court, and the top court should refuse to interfere at this stage..As per the report published by The Wire, the FIR contains allegations that an advocate, Komatla Srinivasa Swamy Reddy, has alleged that Dammalapati Srinivas, who served as the AG during the N. Chandrababu Naidu regime, had used his influence to first gather information about the capital's plan, and then purchase vast tracts of land in the premium core capital region.."It was alleged in the complaint that some of the public servants in high positions took advantage of their involvement in the decision-making process pertaining to the fixing of the exact location of the core capital area and that such people purchased lands for themselves either through benamidars or through their family members and associates/acquaintances after sharing the privileged information about the core capital area that they were privy to, thereby enriching themselves," the FIR said..Read the Supreme Court's order.http://theleaflet.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/20400_2020_34_9_24837_Order_25-Nov-2020.pdf
