[ad_1]
“Not a single instance of influencing witnesses or violating any of the bail conditions has been placed before this court by the petitioner,” the CJ said. No evidence was shown to suggest that the AP CM was encouraging other accused in the quid pro quo case with plum postings in the AP government, the CJ said and dismissed the petition.
Justice Bhuyan said the affidavit filed by Raju against Jagan was devoid of any particulars. He did not name the witnesses who were threatened or allured by Jagan.
“Merely saying that he is abusing his CM position by giving important postings to the co-accused is not enough. You (Raju) should show evidence and there is nothing of that sort in your affidavit,” the CJ said.
Even the CBI had conceded that there has been no change in the circumstances in the last one year when the trial court rejected Raju’s plea seeking cancellation of Jagan bail, the CJ said.
Distinguishing cancellation of bail from rejection of bail, the Supreme Court observed that cancellation of bail was a harsh order because it takes away the liberty granted to an individual and was not to be lightly resorted to, he added.
It can be recalled the court did not feel the need to issue a notice to the AP CM in this case. Courts would order notice only when they find prima facie material to do so. But in this case, the court found no material to issue a notice and dismissed Raju’s plea.
Raju is a disgruntled MP in Jagan’s YSRC. When AP CID arrested him, Raju approached the Supreme Court charging the state government and police with wilfully misbehaving with him. He levelled allegations of torture while in CID custody. The apex court had ordered last year that he be given treatment in Military Hospital in Secunderabad.
[ad_2]
Source link