HYDERABAD: The recent acquittal of four persons, who were charged with harbouring the accused and conspiring in the murder of AP-based gangster Gangula Suryanarayana Reddy alias Maddelacheruvu Suri, would not have taken place had the investigation agency - CID not left out a few aspects of the case from probe which would otherwise have nailed them.
The main accused M Bhanukiran and his aide Manmohan Singh were convicted in the case. The court which pronounced the judgment on December 18 last year acquitted Sulam Subbaiah, Boya Venkata Haribabu, Avula Venkata Ramana and Katikareddy Vamseedhar Reddy of all charges framed against them.
Bhanukiran was sentenced to life and Manmohan was sentenced to an imprisonment up to five years. Pronouncing Subbaiah not guilty, the First Additional Metropolitan Sessions court found that the investigating agency did not obtain the sanction of the government to prosecute a person found in possession of un-licenced arm as it is mandatory.
“But in the case, for the reasons best known to the investigating agency, it had failed to obtain the sanction of the government, in spite of seizure of a 9mm pistol from him, “ the court observed. As a result, the court found him not guilty and acquitted him from all the charges of Arms Act. He was also acquitted from all other charges.
Haribabu, Ramana and Vamseedhar Reddy were accused of conspiracy in the murder, as the investigating agency found that they were in regular contact with Bhanukiran and Manmohan Singh and also submitted their call data records (CDRs) to the court as the evidence.
The court said the call data itself is not sufficient to show that that other accused are aware about the offence being committed by Bhanukiran. Merely going by the fact that Bhanukiran and Manmohan had made calls to them on the date of the incident , does not prove that they were part of the conspiracy. “Moreover, the CID did not obtain the voice records of the telephonic conversation between the accused persons to show that they communicated with each other with regard to the commission of the murder,” the court pointed out.
The investigating agency also failed to retrieve the messages which were exchanged between Bhanukiran and Subbaiah, the court further observed.
They were also charges that those acquitted of harbouring Bhanukiran after the offence. The court said that after going through the entire evidence, it found that there was nothing to show that they harboured Bhanukiran after the offence.
The court also pointed out that investigation officer had claimed that he had handed over the bullet and lead pieces recovered from the body of Suri to FSL for examination but the scientific officer at the FSL told the court that they did not receive any.
What has turned against Bhanukiran?
A driving license issued by Madhya Pradesh and a PAN card issued in the name Mahesh Kunjum with a photo of Bhanukiran affized on them gave Bhanukiran away. The court also noted that if he was not involved in the offence, there was no need for him to go into hiding for more than year, keeping his phone switched off and never made any attempt to reach any of the family members of Suri even after knowing that he had been murdered, the court reasoned.