Telangana High Court (Photo | Express)
Telangana

Telangana HC upholds CBI court’s rejection of plea to release Janardhan Reddy’s seized assets

Justice Lakshman was hearing a batch of three petitions filed by Gali Kireeti Reddy, daughter of Janardhan Reddy, and two others.

TG Naidu

HYDERABAD: Justice J Lakshman of the Telangana High Court has upheld the orders of the CBI court rejecting a plea to direct the CBI to release the 54 kg gold ornaments, Rs 3 crore in cash and bonds seized during the arrest of mining baron Gali Janardhan Reddy.

Justice Lakshman was hearing a batch of three petitions filed by Gali Kireeti Reddy, daughter of Janardhan Reddy, and two others.

The CBI court had on October 25, 2016 dismissed the petitioners’ applications for the return of the seized property, including approximately 54 kg gold ornaments, Rs 2.94 crore in cash and bonds purchased in the names of Janardhan son and daughter. The property was seized by the CBI on September 5, 2011, and has remained in its custody since then.

The petitioners contended that the seized valuables would deteriorate over time due to exposure, thereby losing their value. However, Justice Lakshman rejected this argument, stating that such claims were insufficient grounds to seek interim custody of the seized assets. The court found no error in the CBI court’s reasoning and dismissed the petitions on the basis that the lower court’s order was well-founded and reasoned.

Incidentally, the ED had issued a provisional attachment order regarding the seized property, which was later confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority. According to the ED, proceeds from the alleged crime were invested in the form of 88,41,30,000 shares in M/s Brahmani Industries, which have already been attached. The matter is currently pending before the SC.

The Special Public Prosecutor for the CBI argued against the maintainability of the petitions, asserting that the orders were final and that the petitioners should have filed a revision petition under Section 397(2) of the CrPC instead of invoking Section 482.

The court noted that the petitioners had missed the 60-day limitation period for filing a revision and had instead filed a petition under Section 482 on October 27, 2017.

Trump upbeat as US, Iran hold 'very good' indirect talks in Qatar

Nepal ready for diplomatic dialogue with India to resolve border dispute, says Foreign Minister Khanal

From India's furnace to Europe's inferno: The science behind extreme heat

Why the US Supreme Court's birthright citizenship ruling is a major relief for Indians

India urges Pakistan to free 188 prisoners; seeks consular access to 13 Indians

SCROLL FOR NEXT