Relief for ‘Veekshanam’ editor as court directs cops not to arrest N Venu Gopal
The case was registered in 2019 for offences under sections 10, 13,18, 18(B), 20 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and section 8 of the Telangana Public Security Act
Published Date - 28 February 2025, 11:02 PM
Hyderabad: Justice K Surender of the Telangana High Court on Friday provided relief to N Venu Gopal, the editor of ‘Veekshanam’ journal, by directing the LB Nagar police not to arrest him in connection with a criminal case that alleges his links with the banned CPI (Maoist) party.
The case was registered in 2019 for offences under sections 10, 13,18, 18(B), 20 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and section 8 of the Telangana Public Security Act.
Venu and other accused developed contacts with several underground Maoist leaders, arrested and surrendered cadres throughout the country, to unite all the frontal organisations, activists to wage war against and dethrone the state, alleged the complaint.
Representing Venu Gopal, Senior Advocate V Raghunath argued that Venu is a reputed journalist and he took an active role in the Telangana statehood movement.
Contentions are raised that false implication of individuals in serious offences would curtail democratic voices. He argued that Venu Gopal was implicated solely based on a retracted confession statement.
He also drew attention to Venu’s role as a member of the Governing Council of the Telangana Press Academy, as well as the fact that Veekshanam magazine receives support from government advertisements, further underscoring his reputation as a journalist and public figure.
Responding to the case, Justice Surender questioned the public prosecutor about the progress of the investigation and the material gathered so far. However, the prosecutor’s response was deemed unsatisfactory.
Although the judge directed the police to present the full investigation material before the court, he later directed that the investigation continue without arresting the editor. The quash petition is adjourned for further hearing.