HYDERABAD: In a major relief to senior IAS officer K Ratna Prabha, the Hyderabad High Court on Wednesday quashed the charges framed against her by the Central Bureau of Investigation in the illegal assets case of YSR Congress president Jagan Mohan Reddy.
While allowing the petition filed by Ratna Prabha, an accused in the Indu Tech zone aspect of Jagan’s illegal assets case, justice V Suri Appa Rao, in his judgment, ruled that the allegations against the petitioner are baseless and there was no prima facie case made against her.
It may be mentioned here that the CBI has charged Ratna Prabha for allegedly extending undue favour to Indu Tech Pvt Ltd in allotting land in the capacity of secretary to Information Technology and Communication department. The CBI has framed charges against her under Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 409 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) of the IPC. The Special CBI Court has taken cognizance of charge sheet of the CBI and showed Ratna Prabha as accused number 9 in the illegal assets case and passed an order on October 10, 2013.
Aggrieved by the order Ratna Prabha moved the High Court seeking to quash the criminal proceedings initiated against her by the CBI, contending that she had discharged her duty after duly following the instructions of the government under Article 311 of the Constitution and also the Business Rules and Secretariat Instructions.
After perusing the records and material placed before him, justice Appa Rao held that no ingredients have been made out under Sections 120-B, 409 and 420 of the IPC against the petitioner.
The judge declared that there was no reason as to why the petitioner must be made to undergo the agony of a criminal trial.
The judge found that the AP Industrial Infrastructure Corporation (APIIC) has forwarded the applications for the process after it had satisfied with the norms. Three IT companies, including the Indu Tech Zone Pvt Ltd, have submitted their applications to set up IT companies and the CBI also in its affidavit admitted that the APIIC is the nodal agency for allotment of land and fixation of land value.
The judge observed that the note file of the APIIC was processed through secretaries of Law, Finance and Revenue and the Chief Secretary and then after the opinion of the Chief Secretary, the file was placed before the Cabinet and after approval of the Cabinet the MOUs are being entered into and finally the land was allotted to three companies.
The judge pointed out that the signatures of the chief secretary were very much available on the note file and in fact the petitioner forwarded the note file before the Cabinet after incorporating the notings of the finance department. The petitioner cannot be found fault as it is the duty of the government either to approve or disapprove a decision placed before it in due process.
Referring to Supreme Court’s verdict in MC Mehta’s case, the judge said as per Section 173 (2) of CrPC , the prosecuting officer has to form an opinion before forwarding the charge sheet to the court, but in this case it was lacking.
Justice Appa Rao opined that it is a fit case where prosecution to be quashed by this court. ‘’In view of the facts allowing proceedings to continue would amount to an abuse of process of court.