JOIN USSenior advocate C V Nagesh who appeared for Katta Jagadish argued that his clients were wrongfully implicated with malafide intention in the case. He said the whole scam has been split into three cases-- 43/2010, 48/2010 and 57/2010-- and Katta Jagadish was framed in all of them. He pointed out that a case was registered against Jagadish under Section 10 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA), though he is not a public servant but a BBMP corporator.
“As the High Court quashed investigation in case number 48/2010, the Lokayukta made Jagadish additional accused in 43/2010 and further in case number 57/2010,” Nagesh contended.
The advocate said there was no need for the Lokayukta to seek permission from the Governor for prosecution since Katta Subramanya Naidu had quit as a minister. Instead permission should have been sought from the Assembly Speaker since the senior Naidu is an MLA. The Governor too granted permission though he had no jurisdiction. Speaker’s permission and not governor’s sanction was necessary, the advocate pointed out.
More time in Mantri case
The High Court has granted BBMP an additional 10 days’ time to file its objections in the Mantri Mall ramp demolition case. The Palike should have filed its objections on Tuesday,but sought time as the affidavit had some last minute corrections.
Mantri Mall had filed a petition in the High Court after the BBMP demolished the ramp adjoining the mall. Mantri had contended that the Palike itself had approved the plan. The High Court had granted an interim stay of four weeks on the demolition of the ramp.