HYDERABAD: Panjagutta police registered a case against singer Mangli alias Satyavathi, her brother and others for allegedly intimidating an advocate, Singapogu Subbarao, over a nearly Rs 10 crore issue.
The advocate complained to the police that sometime back, a few of his clients informed him that certain individuals had cheated them by inducing them to invest money of approximately Rs 9.5 crore to 10 crore in microfinance schemes with false promises of high returns.
He alleged that the money was collected from them by Ramavath Madhu, Paul alias Bharat Chauhan, Paul alias Shailaja Chauhan, and Shiva, who is the brother of Mangli.
They had represented that the collected funds would be invested in import-export, real estate, and trading businesses and high returns would be paid later. However, after a few days, their phones went off.
After hearing his client, the advocate contacted Mangli. However, she had allegedly spoken to him in an abusive and insulting manner.
Later, based on the evidence provided by his clients, he shared the details with some media. Subsequently, Mangli had contacted him not to file a case against them and attempted to offer money. The advocate had refused.
Later, through film director Venu Udugula and Advocate Pujari Nageswara Rao, he was invited for a discussion at the office of Nageswara Rao at Panjagutta.
During the meeting, all of them had allegedly pressured him not to file a case against Mangli and her brother and to delete the media interviews. He had refused their requests.
While he was leaving the premises, Venu Udugula had allegedly threatened him to listen to them. Mangli had allegedly abused him and had threatened to kill him. Mangli had connected a phone call with Ramavath Madhu and her brother Shiva, who had allegedly abused and threatened him over the phone.
Shiva had allegedly threatened that he would kill him in a road accident.
The advocate alleged that at that time, Mangli had allegedly attempted to physically assault him.
Based on his complaint, the police registered a case under 351(2), 352 BNS sections and launched an investigation.