HYDERABAD: Challenging the ACB case in the alleged Formula-E race irregularities, former municipal administration minister KT Rama Rao in his affidavit contended that any procedural irregularities in the execution of the agreement were the responsibility of the officers concerned and not him.
Arguing that the FIR was registered without conducting a preliminary inquiry as mandated by law, he said that there was 14 months delay in lodging complaint. The sole intention was to defame him and exact political revenge, the BRS working president alleged.
“The FIR does not disclose any prima facie evidence of commission of an offence, and the allegations are fabricated to tarnish my reputation,” Rama Rao stated. He further noted that the alleged beneficiary of the supposed wrongful gain was not named as an accused in the FIR.
Responding to the allegations of financial mismanagement, the former minister clarified that the agreement for hosting the Formula-E Race Season 10 event was approved following due procedures.
E-Prix deal approved with due process: KTR
He pointed out that the Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA), an independent legal entity, was designated as the promoter and host for the event after the private sponsor failed to fulfil its financial obligations.
Rama Rao explained that payments for the event were structured in three installments and required approvals, which were obtained before the model code of conduct (MCC) came into force on October 9, 2023.
He refuted claims that the payments violated the MCC, noting that no notice was issued by the Election Commission of India in this regard. He stated that after October 9, 2023, he ceased to hold authority over the matter, as the MCC had rendered him functus officio.
The affidavit underscored the economic impact of the Formula-E Season 9 event held in February 2023, which reportedly generated USD 83 million in revenue for the state, as per a Nielsen Sports analysis. Rama Rao argued that the failure of the subsequent government to pay the remaining 50 percent of the agreement amount led to a loss of `55 crore and missed revenue opportunities for the state.
He contended that the FIR did not establish any offences and termed the continuation of the investigation as an abuse of legal process aimed at harassing and humiliating him. He urged the High Court to quash the FIR, arguing that it was filed with malafide intent and lacked substantive evidence.
The Telangana High Court is yet to decide on the petition, which sought quashing of the FIR registered against the former minister.