The Telangana High Court, under the bench of Justice K. Lakshman, has dismissed a petition filed by Senior Advocate Mr. Vedula Venkataramana seeking to quash an FIR accusing him of accepting a bribe to influence High Court judges.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court, under the bench of Justice K. Lakshman, has dismissed a petition filed by Senior Advocate Mr. Vedula Venkataramana seeking to quash an FIR accusing him of accepting a bribe to influence High Court judges.
The detailed judgment was delivered today in Criminal Petition No. 1866 of 2024.
Background of the Case
The case originated from a complaint filed by Mr. Nimma Narayana, the third respondent in the case, on December 16, 2023. Mr. Narayana alleged that in 2005, he and other members of his community, who belong to a Scheduled Caste, engaged Mr. Venkataramana to represent them in land dispute cases in Bowrampet village, Mechal-Malkajgiri District.
They alleged that after paying an initial fee of Rs. 30,00,000, Mr. Venkataramana demanded an additional Rs. 7,00,00,000 to bribe High Court judges for a favorable judgment. Despite making the payment, Mr. Narayana claimed that no progress was made in their case and that Mr. Venkataramana colluded with the opposite party.
The complaint also mentioned caste-based abuse and threats of abduction and murder from Mr. Venkataramana and co-accused, Mr. Ahmed Bin Abdulla Balala, an MLA of Malakpet constituency, when Mr. Narayana demanded the return of the money.
Legal Issues Involved
Quashing of FIR: The primary legal issue was whether the FIR No. 26/2024, filed on January 25, 2024, should be quashed based on allegations of falsehood and mala fide intent.
Proof of Payment and Preliminary Inquiry: The petitioner contended that there was no evidence supporting the payment of Rs. 7,00,00,000 and that a preliminary inquiry should have been conducted before registering the FIR.
Delay in Filing Complaint: The complaint was lodged 19 years after the alleged incident, raising questions about its timeliness and the intent behind the delay.
Nature of Allegations: The court had to consider whether the allegations, involving the bribing of judges, constituted a cognizable offence warranting investigation.
Court’s Observations and Decision
Justice K. Lakshman, after hearing arguments from Mr. V. Pattabhi (representing Mr. Venkataramana), Mr. Palle Nageshwar Rao (Public Prosecutor), and Mr. Nimma Narayana (the complainant), made several important observations:
Maintainability of Complaint: The court noted that even if the complainant was a party to an illegal agreement (paying a bribe), criminal proceedings for cheating are maintainable, referencing past judgments such as Yacoob v. Emperor and Nagi Reddy v. State.
Quashing of FIR under Section 482 CrPC: Emphasizing the need for restraint in quashing FIRs, the court cited the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra which state that quashing should be an exception rather than the rule, especially during the investigation stage.
Serious Nature of Allegations: The allegations against Mr. Venkataramana were deemed serious, implicating the integrity of the judiciary. The court highlighted the necessity of a thorough investigation to uphold the independence of the judiciary.
Protection from Arrest: Despite refusing to quash the FIR, the court granted Mr. Venkataramana protection from arrest, citing the absence of Section 438 CrPC (anticipatory bail) provisions under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The court referenced Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India, which allows for protection under Section 482 CrPC in appropriate cases.
Investigation Directions: The court directed the investigating officer to conduct a detailed investigation, focusing on the pendency of cases, the petitioner’s involvement, the complainant’s financial capacity, and adherence to transaction regulations.
The judgment concluded with Justice Lakshman asserting the need for a detailed investigation into the allegations against Mr. Venkataramana while providing him with interim protection from arrest.
Conclusion
This case underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding its integrity while ensuring a thorough investigation into serious allegations.
The Telangana High Court’s decision to dismiss the petition and order an investigation demonstrates its resolve to address corruption and maintain public trust in the legal system.
The upcoming detailed investigation will shed further light on the matter and determine the veracity of the allegations against Mr. Venkataramana.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Bribe
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
