Jagan Mohan Reddy has moved the Andhra Pradesh High Court seeking Z+ security. Meanwhile, the court deferred to June 16 its decision on whether SC/ST Act accused can directly seek anticipatory bail from the High Court.
YS Jagan Mohan Reddy, the former Chief Minister and leader of the YSR Congress Party, submitted a petition to the Andhra Pradesh High Court on Thursday regarding the inaction of both the Central and State governments concerning his request to restore Z+ category security.
He argued that the lack of adequate protection from the CRPF or NSG constituted a violation of constitutional standards and called for an independent reassessment of his threat level to reinstate Z+ security. If this was not feasible, he requested permission to use his own bulletproof vehicle.
Following the change in government, his security was significantly reduced without prior notice, despite ongoing risks. Accusing the State of neglecting its duty to protect public figures, Jagan urged the court to order the restoration of Z+ security.
The issue is scheduled for a hearing on Friday.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court granted relief to Sajjala Bhargav Reddy, the former YSRCP social media head, and other activists in a case concerning social media posts that challenged the police’s application of BNSS Section 111 (organized crime).
The court ruled that Section 111 requires a chargesheet from the past decade, which was absent, rendering the case legally untenable. It determined that the charges against Bhargav Reddy and others were unwarranted based on preliminary evidence and instructed the police to adhere to BNSS Section 35(3).
Justice N. Vijay issued these orders on Wednesday, calling for swift action from the government.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has postponed its decision on whether individuals accused in SC/ST cases can directly seek anticipatory bail in the High Court or must first approach the SC/ST special court until June 16.
On Thursday, Justices Kanchireddy Suresh Reddy and V. Sujatha denied former minister Kakani Govardhan Reddy’s request for interim protection against stringent police action.
Kakani filed an anticipatory bail petition in relation to an illegal mining case initiated by the Podalakuru police, which was later compounded by an SC/ST case.
Kakani’s counsel, O. Manohar Reddy, sought interim relief to prevent police action, but the Advocate General referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in TA Hameed vs M. Viswanathan, which limited the bench’s authority. Upholding this precedent, the bench declined to issue interim orders and scheduled the next hearing for June 16.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
