JOIN USCBI stopped further probe due to fear of harassment in murder of Andhra Pradesh's CM's uncle: SC
The Supreme Court observed that the probe conducted by the CBI in the 2019 murder of former Andhra Pradesh Minister Y S Vivekananda Reddy had hit a roadblock fearing harrassment as FIR was lodged against CBI officers by the Andhra Pradesh police.
A bench of Justices M R Shah and M M Sundresh, which transferred trial from Kapada to Hyderabad, said that there is a reasonable apprehension on the part of Suneetha Narreddy, daughter of the deceased and her mother, that there shall not be a fair investigation so far as the further investigation on larger conspiracy and destruction of evidence is concerned.
In its judgement, the bench said, "As per the settled position of law, justice is not to be done but the justice is seen to have been done also. Free and fair trial is sine qua non of Article 21 of the Constitution. If the criminal trial is not free and fair and if it is biased, judicial fairness and the criminal justice system would be at stake, shaking the confidence of the public in the system."
The deceased, brother of former AP CM Y S Rajasekhara Reddy and uncle of current CM Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy, was killed on the intervening night of March 14 and 15, 2019. Jagan also approached the HC for CBI probe subsequently after he became CM, he opposed the plea.
The court noted following the High Court's order, further investigation by the CBI was still to continue.
"However, during the course of further investigation, an FIR against the officers of the CBI is filed which has been stayed by the High Court. It appears that therefore apprehending harassment and filing false/frivolous complaints, the CBI/investigating agency stopped further investigation. Therefore, there is a reasonable apprehension that there shall not be any fair investigation," the bench said.
The court also noted that due to the threat, even two key witnesses, namely, Shaik Dastagiri and Ranganna were already given the police protection under the Witnesses Protection Scheme, 2018.
The bench also found that one of the key witnesses, namely, K Gangadhar Reddy, though initially volunteered to give his statement under Section 164 CrPC. However, he did not turn up to get his statement recorded and on the contrary he claimed before the media that he was being pressurised by the CBI. Thereafter he has died under mysterious circumstances.
Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra, appearing for the petitioners, said though in the chargesheet, the role of one Y S Avinash Reddy, a sitting Member of Parliament from the ruling party in Andhra Pradesh came to light. The MP was mentioned as a suspect due to key role in the destruction of the evidence and spreading false news that the deceased died due to heart attack, he has not yet been arrested and the state authorities and the influential people are using all kinds of tactics to scuttle the investigation with the aim to shield him and his close associate D Shiv Shankar Reddy, he claimed.
Senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Guru Krishnakumar, appearing on behalf of respondents/impleaders, as well as senior advocate S Niranjan Reddy for the State, opposed the petition for shifting of the proceedings outside the state.