MLA Poaching Case| CM Had Zero Involvement In Investigation, State Argues Before Telangana HC Against Order For CBI Probe

Mr. Dave started off his argument today by stating, “Proving colourable exercise of power is very important. All allegations against Chief Minister were made without making him a party. It is a violation of Principles of Natural Justice. On this ground alone, HC should have stopped enquiry. The learned judge has been overly influenced by this fact which in my submissions he should not have.”

Arguing that the Chief Minister had zero involvement with the investigation of the case, Mr. Dave submitted, “It has nothing to do with the Chief Minister. It is not that the CM gave a press statement and then the police has registered an FIR. After the press conference, investigation has been stalled by one order or the other. The entire argument that the press conference affecting the investigation is a figment of imagination. There must be a causal relationship. There is no relationship here. ”

“It is too late in the day to argue that because the CM played the video in the press conference there is possibility of grave injustice. Post filing of the FIR you can't say press conference affected the investigation”, Mr. Dave added.

Countering the judgment of the learned single judge on merits, Mr. Dave submitted, “The learned single judge does not even advert to the law which was brought on to his kind notice.”

Mr. Dave also later argued and said, “All Constitutional Institutions are gone. Judiciary is loved the most these days.”

During Monday’s hearing, Mr Dave had argued that the Respondents, having received a favourable order, could not engage in ‘forum shopping’.

He had said, “This cannot be treated in an ingenious way to indulge in forum shopping. Having received a beneficial order, now you cannot say that this was a criminal case therefore appeal cannot lie. You have to look at the averments. That is the litmus test.”

Mr. Dave was responding to the submissions made by the Respondents on the maintainability of the Appeal stating that the order of the single judge was in exercise of the Criminal Writ Jurisdiction and therefore an LPA did not lie against the impugned order.

Mr. Dave had further argued by first pointing out to the court that the order passed by the Learned Single Judge is not in a criminal jurisdiction. He said, “There's a complete misreading of the clause itself. The order is not in criminal jurisdiction. It is solely a mandamus. Therefore, appeal is clearly maintainable. Supreme court has made it very clear. Mandamus is always exercised in the realm of public law, never criminal law. There is no exercise of criminal jurisdiction here.”

“There was no exercise of criminal jurisdiction by the single judge. No averments were made in that regard. Having received a favourable order from the single judge, you cannot now do forum shopping. No aspects of criminality were either raised or answered by the learned Single Judge. They didn't rely on any provisions of the CrPC. They didn't rely on 482 either. It is a purely civil case,” he added.

While responding on merits, Mr. Dave argued, “The CDs were already produced before the Magistrate and the High Court. Where is the link between the CM giving these CDs to the press and the investigation being biased?”

Pointing out that the Respondents have completely failed to show bias in the investigation, Mr. Dave argued, “I respectfully submit that you cannot base your entire case on bias because you are interfering with the State's duty to investigate. This can only be done in rarest of rare cases.”

“Courts don't usually find lack of faith in the state police for mere asking. Have the CDs in any way altered the course of investigation? They were caught red handed in a trap based on the guidelines of the Supreme Court judgement. The findings of the learned single judge are unsustainable.”

Senior Advocate Udaya Holla appearing for one of the Respondents earlier submitted before the court that, “Fairness in an investigation is an absolute requirement. There is a lack of objectivity, the Supreme Court has time and again held that if there is a lack of objectivity, it is a case for transfer to the CBI.”

Senior Advocate SD Sanjay also appearing for one of the Respondents had submitted, “The Chief Minister has been made a party in the petition. There were only three IPS officers in the SIT and rest all were state officers. State officers are under the direct control of the Chief Minister. In such situation, can there be a fair investigation?”

On October 26, Pilot Rohith Reddy, MLA, Tandur Assembly, lodged a first information report alleging that three accused persons met him and asked him to not contest as a candidate of the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) party.

Instead, he was allegedly asked to resign from the BRS and join the BJP and offered an "amount of Rs 100 crores besides contract works of the Central government".

Reddy further alleged that the accused persons threatened to foist criminal cases on him in case he did not agree to their proposal. Pursuant to his complaint, Moinabad Police Station registered an FIR under Sections 120B, 171B, 171E, and 506 of the IPC r/w Section 34 of the IPC and under Section 8 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

Subsequently, the BJP filed a writ petition before the single judge of the Telangana High Court praying for the entrusting of investigation of the matter to an SIT/CBI to ensure a free and fair probe.

On November 15, the Telangana High Court allowed the state government-constituted Special Investigation Team to continue its probe into the MLA poaching case, and also ordered that a single judge of the court would monitor the progress of the investigation.

However, on November 21, the Supreme Court quashed the directions passed by the Telangana High Court and directed it to decide the plea for the CBI probe moved by three accused in the matter.

On November 25, the Telangana High Court stayed the notice issued by the Special Investigation Team to BJP's National General Secretary B.L. Santhosh in connection with the ongoing investigation in the alleged TRS MLA poaching case. Earlier this month, the High Court granted bail to three accused.

On December 26, the Learned Single Judge had ordered for the transfer of the case to the CBI.