Telangana HC stays ED move to attach BRS MP’s properties
The MP's counsel E Venkata Siddarth submitted that the petitioner was not an accused in the predicate offence
Hyderabad: Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan of the Telangana High Court on Friday granted stay of Enforcement Directorate (ED) proceedings and attachment of assets of the Khammam MP Nama Nageswar Rao. The TRS MP sought quashing of the ED proceedings in a case linked to a CBI court trial in Ranchi for alleged fraud against Ranchi Expressway Ltd, a subsidiary of Madhucon Group. The Ranchi firm is facing allegetions of misusing Rs 360 crore of bank loans.
The MP’s counsel E Venkata Siddarth submitted that the petitioner was not an accused in the predicate offence. He further said, petitioner was in no way concerned with Ranchi Expressway Limited and Madhucon Group companies. Neither was he the Director nor Employee of the said firms, he said. Moreover, in the chargesheet filed by CBI, Ranchi and in the ED investigation the name of the petitioner was not reflected, he told court. The Assistant Solicitor General, South Zone appearing on behalf of the ED raised objection against the stay. However, the Chief Justice granted interim order staying the ED proceedings against the MP.
Advocate asked to apologise
The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji directed the advocate B Balamukund Rao to render unconditional apology or face punishment for contempt of court. The court was dealing with a suo motu contempt case taken up based on the legal notice issued by the advocate B Balamukund Rao to High Court judge Justice P. Madhavi Devi. Alleging that he was not given a fair opportunity to represent case, his notice called upon the judge to show cause within seven days, why action shall not be initiated against her.
In the contempt case, the advocate is facing charges of behaving in unruly manner, screaming at other advocates in the court hall and for issuing notice to the judge. The further allegation is that while Justice P. Madhavi Devi was hearing matter pertaining to Tourism department filed by Balamukund Rao, against the judge suggestion, the said Advocate picked up argument with the Judge and walked out of the court hall. The bench observed that advocate was neither apologetic nor realized having lowered the majesty of the High Court.
The Advocate General brought to the notice of court about the suo motu contempt issued against him by the another division bench on earlier occasion and the contempt case filed by the advocate against a former high court judge. The bench warned that his actions attracted criminal contempt. It also asked him think about his 40 years experience at the Bar and the impact on the young advocates and noble profession. The bench suggested him to think over the issue again an render an unconditional apology and adjourned the case to February 17.
