A view of the Supreme Court of India in New Delhi. File
| Photo Credit: PTI
The Supreme Court on July 5 refused to intervene in a petition filed by the private assistant of murdered former Andhra Pradesh Minister Y.S. Vivekananda Reddy, who claimed that as ‘first informant’ he is the competent person to challenge the pardon and anticipatory bail granted to the approver in the case.
A Bench of Justices Krishna Murari and Sanjay Kumar observed that the issues raised by the applicant, M.V. Krishna Reddy, concerned questions of fact and law.
These questions require detailed consideration of arguments raised by parties, and cannot be dealt with by the Supreme Court.
Mr. Krishna Reddy had moved the Supreme Court for a clarification of its October 10, 2022 order. The October 2022 order had said the “competent person” could challenge the pardon and anticipatory bail granted by the trial court to Shaik Dastaghiri, the approver in the murder case, in “appropriate proceedings”.
Mr. Krishna Reddy urged the Supreme Court to clarify that as the first informant in the case, he was the competent person. He further sought a clarification that a challenge by him to the anticipatory bail and pardon given to Mr. Dastaghiri would come within the ambit of “any appropriate proceedings” mentioned by the Supreme Court in the October 2022 order.
In its order on July 6, the court pointed out that Mr. Krishna Reddy had never raised these questions in the earlier proceedings.
“The present issues flagged for clarification were never raised by the parties in the original proceedings… Such new arguments which strikes at the core of the case cannot be decided by a mere clarification application. Such questions are to be answered by the appropriate forum as and when questions are posed by the parties,” the Bench observed in the order, disposing of the case.
Mr. Krishna Reddy had blamed the CBI, which is investigating the murder and the larger conspiracy behind the crime, for “facilitating” both the orders of pardon and anticipatory bail.
However, Dr. Suneetha Narreddy, the daughter of the slain Minister, represented by senior advocate Siddharth Luthra and advocate Jasal Wahi, had argued that Mr. Krishna Reddy’s attempt was aimed to discredit the statements made by Mr. Dastaghiri as an approver and dilute the CBI investigation in favour of the accused persons. The intervention application filed by Ms. Narreddy said Mr. Dastaghiri’s statements had shed light into the crime for the CBI. In fact, Mr. Luthra had questioned the very locus standi of Mr. Krishna Reddy.
Ms. Narreddy alleged that Mr. Krishna Reddy was arrested in the case on March 28, 2019. “As per newspaper report, Respondent No.3 [Krishna Reddy] has now been named as suspect/accused in the supplementary charge sheet filed on June 30, 2023,” she said.
“He [Krishna Reddy] has made contentions similar to those made by the accused, pointed fingers at the investigating agency, raised arguments defending the accused, virtually giving them a clean chit,” Ms. Narreddy had argued in the Supreme Court.
Ms. Narreddy had reminded the court that she and her mother had been pursuing justice for the “gruesome murder” of Vivekananda Reddy in his house at Pulivendula in Kadapa on the intervening night of March 14-15, 2019.
Vivekananda Reddy was the brother of Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy (former Chief Minister of united State of Andhra Pradesh) and uncle of Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy, the current Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh and the Opposition Leader at the time of the incident.