N.V ramana CJI avthada?

[Boomer]

No antunna @Hydrockers bro nen kuda agreed

[Assam_Bhayya]

NV Ramana ante anti-TDP janaaniki Envy endhuko 

[Boomer]

7 minutes ago, Assam_Bhayya said:

NV Ramana ante anti-TDP janaaniki Envy endhuko 

Envy kadu for anta

[Spartan]

vadi kuture kada Amaravati land scam lo dorikindi..

anduke peru raka munde stay techukunnaru..scam jargaledani... 

[ParmQ]

14 minutes ago, Spartan said:

vadi kuture kada Amaravati land scam lo dorikindi..

anduke peru raka munde stay techukunnaru..scam jargaledani... 

His native place is Ponnavaram. Amaravati CRDA Westzone lo untadhi. Already, they had lands from their forefathers. Capital vacchaka koni undocchu. Or capital announce ki mundhu without knowledge koni undocchu. That can't be taken as insider tranding without establishing priam faice. Jaggadu is taking that opportunity to mud-sling and to show the judiciary in badlight. Stay icchinchidhaniki reason, Govt esina SIT ki constitutional sanctity ledhu. Number of accused people are happy for judicial equity with current or ex judge, not SIT formed by inncer circle of minsters who have political motive. Read the complete case.

[Spartan]

Just now, ParmQ said:

His native place is Ponnavaram. Amaravati CRDA Westzone lo untadhi Already they had lands from their forefathers. Capital vacchaka koni undocchu. Or capital announce ki mundhi without knowledge koni undocchu. That can't be taken as insider tranding without establishing the priam faice. Jaggadu is taking that opportunity to mud-sling.

ACB edo docs submit chesindata ga ame proofs to..that they bought lands with insider info ani.

[galiraju]

[Hydrockers]

7 minutes ago, ParmQ said:

His native place is Ponnavaram. Amaravati CRDA Westzone lo untadhi. Already, they had lands from their forefathers. Capital vacchaka koni undocchu. Or capital announce ki mundhu without knowledge koni undocchu. That can't be taken as insider tranding without establishing priam faice. Jaggadu is taking that opportunity to mud-sling and to show the judiciary in badlight. Stay icchinchidhaniki reason, Govt esina SIT ki constitutional sanctity ledhu. Number of accused people are happy for judicial equity with current or ex judge, not SIT formed by inncer circle of minsters who have political motive. Read the complete case.

Ante payavula paritala vallu insider trading ee ani oppukuntunava

[ARYA]

26 minutes ago, Spartan said:

vadi kuture kada Amaravati land scam lo dorikindi..

anduke peru raka munde stay techukunnaru..scam jargaledani... 

no wonder why he is showing athyutsaham in cancelling the GOs 

[manadonga]

next line lo vunna subhashin reddy kuda amaravati ki full support ye ga 

mostly nv ramana avutadu cji 

[ParmQ]

4 minutes ago, Hydrockers said:

Ante payavula paritala vallu insider trading ee ani oppukuntunava

Naa post okasari malli choodu. Without establishing prima facie, cases court lo nilabadavu. If am not correct Payyavula clearly said in the assembly he bought it after the capital was announced. Same with Paritala. Narayana went a far ahead and filed a case against the YRSCP people for reputational damages. Dhullipalla announced he is happy to give his assets to whoever proves.

Ayina siggulekunda goebbels propaganda chesthunnaru. Thulag and his team cheyyalasina pani enti ante - gather prima facie evidence (like Govt notes, or any leaks from Expert committe on new capital -2014 and subsequent actions by people in those times)agaisnt whoever did the insider trading and file a case in high court attaching that evidence - similar to the evidence submitted in Jagan case, then only any court in the world will accept.

But what he is doing is - his minister politically accuse people of insidr trading and the same accusers will form a SIT without consitutional sanctity and same people wanted judge based on the information which is based on their accusation. It doesn't work like that. Ee lopu half knowledge Paytm batch will spread the lies saying the courts are against our messiagh Jagan.

[ParmQ]

30 minutes ago, Spartan said:

ACB edo docs submit chesindata ga ame proofs to..that they bought lands with insider info ani.

Lol. AP ACB/CB-CID submit chese docs meedha kooda hope undha? If you have followed Kollu Ravndra and Accham Naidu cases closely, you will realise. They dont have any rational evidence prove them guilty. Edho udhi ani hadavidi chesi reputation damage cheyyadam thappa emi ledhu. Maha aithe investigation perutho office ki rammantaru. Or invistigation peru tho konni days lockup chestharu. Nothing more. These are all being done and executed under sajjala ramakrishna reddy direction.

[Spartan]

5 minutes ago, ParmQ said:

Lol. AP ACB/CB-CID submit chese docs meedha kooda hope undha? If you have followed Kollu Ravndra and Accham Naidu cases closely, you will realise. They dont have any rational evidence prove them guilty. Edho udhi ani hadavidi chesi reputation damage cheyyadam thappa emi ledhu. Maha aithe investigation perutho office ki rammantaru. Or invistigation peru tho konni days lockup chestharu. Nothing more. These are all being done and executed under sajjala ramakrishna reddy direction.

but stay order techindi a investigation cheyodu ani kada...

correct me if wrong...

scam em ledu..investigation cheyadaniki velledu ani court nunchi stay order techaru...

PS: this is all info from pakka DB source.

[ParmQ]

53 minutes ago, Spartan said:

but stay order techindi a investigation cheyodu ani kada...

correct me if wrong...

scam em ledu..investigation cheyadaniki velledu ani court nunchi stay order techaru...

PS: this is all info from pakka DB source.

Full - Stay on SIT which didn't follow the constitutional norms and doesn't have sanctity.

 

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMARAVATI

MAIN CASE No: W.P.No.16468 of 2020

ORDER

Sri Mukul Rohatgi and Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Ginjupalli Subba Rao, counsel for the petitioner.

Learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of respondents 1 and 2.

Sri C.V.Mohan Reddy, learned senior counsel assisted by Smt.Renuka, standing counsel for respondent No.3.

Sri S.S.Prasad, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Venkateswara Rao, standing counsel for respondent No.4.

This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by the petitioner alleging mala fides against the State authorities, specifying the reasons as setup in the writ petition.  It is stated that the petitioner herein held the office of Additional Advocate General and thereafter he had become the Advocate General and is a Senior Advocate having long standing at bar.  For the reasons set out in the writ petition, he is being targeted by the Government and, in furtherance thereto, the Government wants to foist a false case against him, alleging purchase of property being aware of establishment of capital in Amaravati, prior to the date of identifying the capital in his name and that of others.  Reference to the letter sent to the Income Tax Department dated 29.01.2020 and letter dated 23.03.2020 of the State Government, sent to the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training, New Delhi, has been made to state it affects the personal liberty without any cogent basis.  It is said that when action was not found justified by central agencies, the state agencies through Police are working out in a mala fide manner.

In view of the aforesaid, prayer is made to call for all the records pertaining to any enquiry/investigation being conducted by any of the State agencies and all the respondents, and to quash the letter dated 23.03.2020; further enquiry may be stayed and no coercive steps against the petitioner may be made.  It is also stated that if any investigation is to be made by the State, it may be under the strict supervision of a Judge of the High Court or in the alternative under the supervision of a Retd. Judge of the High Court, looking to the political vendetta against the petitioner.

The petitioner has joined the present Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh as party (respondent No.5) by name, but, at present, this court is not inclined to issue notice calling his presence/response.

Sri Mukul Rohatgi and Sri Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, have strenuously urged that, if there is any political vendetta, it may be against parties or persons of the respective parties, but, taking action on account of those reasons against a former Advocate General of the State and a Senior Advocate, is unheard of and not warranted, that too, in a planned way, as reflected in the present case.  It is further stated that, after filing of this writ petition, when a learned Judge of this Court has recused hearing and directed the Registry to place the matter before Hon’ble the Chief Justice to list this case before another bench, FIR has been registered today, to give a political colour to it, on the basis of a complaint dated 07.09.2020, by the ACB.  It is further urged that after filing of this petition and recusal from the case by the Hon’ble Judge of this Court, registration of offence immediately projected over the social media and newspapers against the petitioner and also two daughters of a sitting Judge of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, amounting to scandalizing the authority with a mala fide intention, by way of media trial.  In view of the said facts, prayer is made not to take any coercive steps on the basis of registration of FIR including investigation after filing of the writ petition and its publication in the print, electronic and social media.

Reliance has been placed by the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner on a judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Naveen Jindal v. M/s.Zee Media Corporation Ltd., & Anr. [2015 SCC ONLINE DELHI 7810].

Per contra, learned Senior Counsel Sri C.V.Mohan Reddy, appearing on behalf of respondent No.3, contends that as the news has already come in the electronic media, therefore, the said relief is now rendered infructuous; even otherwise, media cannot be restrained to publish news.  Reliance has been placed by him on the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Ltd. & others v. SEBI & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 603].

Learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 has strenuously urged that the manner, in which the pleadings have been made in the name of respondent No.5, is not proper; therefore, it is an abuse of process of the court.  Thus, in such circumstances, interference by this court is not warranted.

Learned senior counsel S.S.Prasad, appearing on behalf of respondent No.4, in reference to the letter dated 23.03.2020, contends that, on account of the allegations as made against the petitioner, FIR has rightly been registered; therefore, at this stage, interference in this writ petition is not warranted.

After hearing learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and considering the facts of the case and the circumstances in which the issue cropped up with respect to a former Advocate General and also looking to the news as read during the course of hearing, in the considered opinion of this court, the response of respondents 1 to 4 and 6 is required.  Let response be filed by them within a period of FOUR WEEKS.

Considering the prayer as made in I.A.Nos.1, 2 and 3 of 2020, by way of interim relief, it is directed that no coercive steps shall be taken in furtherance to FIR No.08/RCO-ACB-GNT/2020 of ACB, Guntur, dated 15.09.2020, which has been registered after filing of this writ petition against any of the accused.  The enquiry, investigation is also 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 Secretary, Home Department, Govt. of A.P., the Director General of Police, A.P., shall inform through the Information and Public Relations Department, Govt. of A.P., to the effect that no electronic or print news item be published with respect to the FIR No.08/RCO-ACB-GNT/2020 of ACB, Guntur, dated 15.09.2020 and connected events until further orders of this Court.  Social media posts shall also not be published and, in this regard, the Director General of Police, A.P., and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Govt. of India, shall take steps to inform the relevant social media platforms/houses in this regard.

[ParmQ]

People who complaining about the gag - Past lo Tiwari sex case lo kooda court icchindhi. And YS Viveka murder case tharuvatha Jagan went to the court and got the restrain from the court.