Telangana High Court says no to coercive steps against Raj Pakala
The High Court on Monday directed the Mokila police not to take any coercive steps against Raj Pakala, businessman and brother-in-law of BRS working president KT Rama Rao, as long as he cooperated with the 41 A notices issued to him.
By Legal Correspondent
Hyderabad: Justice B Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Monday directed the Mokila police not to take any coercive steps against Raj Pakala, businessman and brother-in-law of BRS working president KT Rama Rao, as long as he cooperated with the 41 A notices issued to him. The Judge, conceding with Raj Pakala‘s counsel that one day was not sufficient for responding to the 41 A notice, granted further time of two days for responding.
The Judge also granted liberty to the petitioner for taking assistance of an advocate while responding to the police notices. Raj Pakala had moved High Court in a lunch motion petition seeking stay of the criminal proceedings initiated against him. He told the court that police were acting illegally in serving a notice at 8.30 am to appear before police station by 11 am. Senior counsel Mayur Reddy, appearing on behalf of Raj Pakala said that there was apprehension of arrest if the petitioner appeared before the police. He said the petitioner’s family was conducting a house warming ceremony with children and elderly attending the family get-together. However, a crime was registered to tarnish the political image of the brother in law of petitioner, BRS working president KT Rama Rao, and that no narcotic substances were traced as alleged by the police. The allegations against Madduri Vijay, who allegedly tested positive for cocaine, had nothing to do with Raj Pakala, the counsel said, pointing out that women were forced to submit urine samples to the police. The serving of the notice and insisting on the appearance of petitioner within no time was nothing but highhanded and targeted action, Mayur Reddy argued.
On the other hand, the Additional Advocate General, Imran Khan, argued that the petitioner could not seek a blanket stay on the criminal investigation involving allegations of use of narcotic substances. He said there was no threat of arrest or political vendetta in the matter and that the police were acting in accordance with law. He pressed upon the need for continuing investigation as the allegations involved use of cocaine. The Judge, granting relief to the petitioner, directed the investigating officer to proceed with investigation in accordance with law.
Earlier in the day, Raj Pakala, whose residence was raided late on Saturday night followed by searches on Sunday, was summoned by the Cyberabad Police for questioning. He was asked to appear before the Mokila police by 11 am on Monday. The notice was issued under Section 35 (3) of the BNSS in connection with the cases registered under Sections 25, 27 and 29 of the NDPS Act, and Sections 3 and 4 of the TS Gambling Act on Sunday. If he failed to attend or comply with the terms, he was liable for arrest under Sections 35(3), (4), (5) and (6) of the BNSS, the notice stated.
In the notice, the police claimed that there were reasonable grounds to question Raj Pakala to ascertain facts and circumstances from him, with regard to the ongoing investigation into the cases registered against him. The police had raided the residence of Raj Pakala at Janwada during a family function, which was depicted as a “rave party”. However, Pakala and his family members, along with BRS leaders, rubbished the police’s claims, pointing out that the Excise authorities had confirmed that no drugs were found at the function as was being propagated.
