<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the Andhra Pradesh High Court's September 15 order gagging the media from reporting a case of alleged corruption and illegal land transactions in shifting of state capital to Amravati.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy and M R Shah stayed the HC's interim order which prohibited publication of news with regard to the registration of an FIR in any electronic, print or social media.</p>.<p>The top court, however, issued notice to former Advocate General Dammalapati Srinivas and others on whose plea the HC had passed the order.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for the Y S Jaganmohan Reddy government, contended that the HC order was unprecedented as it acted on a writ petition which was "entirely of political nature against the Chief Minister and the state government".</p>.<p>"When there were allegations against certain land transfers, should it not be investigated?" he asked.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the former A-G, submitted that as many as 25 criminal cases were pending against the Chief Minister and the present government wanted to destroy reputation of this lawyer.</p>.<p>Dhavan said even the CBI was sent a letter on March 23 for probe, the HC, however, passed the order not only staying the probe but also publication of news regarding it.</p>.<p>He also referred to bland allegations made in the petition like "there was utter disregard of the Constitution" which can't be the basis for relief in a criminal case.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for other parties, submitted that the HC can very well deal with the matter and the top court should not interfere. But there was a vote of no confidence against the HC and the CM made allegations against the Chief Justice. The case is about "regime revenge", he said.</p>.<p>The court, however, said the matter required consideration and put it for hearing in January. It also sought a response from the parties in the petition.</p>.<p>The state government, in its petition filed by advocate Mahfooz A Nazki, sought stay on the HC's order, saying "the investigation process is at a nascent stage and the stay of the investigation may lead to destruction of material documents, tampering of evidence and evasion of the investigation process".</p>.<p>It said the HC's order, granting blanket stay, was erroneous, illegal, perverse and liable to be set aside as the accused persons did not enjoy any immunity or privilege.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the Andhra Pradesh High Court's September 15 order gagging the media from reporting a case of alleged corruption and illegal land transactions in shifting of state capital to Amravati.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy and M R Shah stayed the HC's interim order which prohibited publication of news with regard to the registration of an FIR in any electronic, print or social media.</p>.<p>The top court, however, issued notice to former Advocate General Dammalapati Srinivas and others on whose plea the HC had passed the order.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for the Y S Jaganmohan Reddy government, contended that the HC order was unprecedented as it acted on a writ petition which was "entirely of political nature against the Chief Minister and the state government".</p>.<p>"When there were allegations against certain land transfers, should it not be investigated?" he asked.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the former A-G, submitted that as many as 25 criminal cases were pending against the Chief Minister and the present government wanted to destroy reputation of this lawyer.</p>.<p>Dhavan said even the CBI was sent a letter on March 23 for probe, the HC, however, passed the order not only staying the probe but also publication of news regarding it.</p>.<p>He also referred to bland allegations made in the petition like "there was utter disregard of the Constitution" which can't be the basis for relief in a criminal case.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for other parties, submitted that the HC can very well deal with the matter and the top court should not interfere. But there was a vote of no confidence against the HC and the CM made allegations against the Chief Justice. The case is about "regime revenge", he said.</p>.<p>The court, however, said the matter required consideration and put it for hearing in January. It also sought a response from the parties in the petition.</p>.<p>The state government, in its petition filed by advocate Mahfooz A Nazki, sought stay on the HC's order, saying "the investigation process is at a nascent stage and the stay of the investigation may lead to destruction of material documents, tampering of evidence and evasion of the investigation process".</p>.<p>It said the HC's order, granting blanket stay, was erroneous, illegal, perverse and liable to be set aside as the accused persons did not enjoy any immunity or privilege.</p>
