Restraint Expected From Those Holding High Offices: Supreme Court

Some sort of restraint is expected when somebody is holding a high office, the Supreme Court said on Monday while hearing a plea seeking transfer of the trial in the 2015 cash-for-vote case, in which Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy is an accused, to Bhopal.

While hearing the matter on August 29, the top court had voiced strong displeasure over Mr Reddy's comments on the top court granting bail to rival Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader K Kavitha in cases linked to the alleged Delhi excise policy scam.

On August 30, the Telangana chief minister had claimed his remarks were taken out of context and expressed "unconditional regret".

In a post on social media platform 'X', he had expressed his highest regard and full faith in the country's judiciary.

The matter came up for hearing on Monday before a bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan.

"Particularly when somebody is holding a high office, some sort of restraint is expected," the bench observed, adding, "It is unfortunate that the courts and lawyers are dragged into this".

On May 31, 2015, Revanth Reddy, then with the Telugu Desam Party, was apprehended by the anti-corruption bureau (ACB) while allegedly paying a Rs 50 lakh bribe to Elvis Stephenson, a nominated MLA, for supporting TDP nominee Vem Narendar Reddy in the legislative council elections.

Apart from Revanth Reddy, the ACB had arrested some others. All of them were later granted bail.

During the hearing on Monday, senior advocate CA Sundaram, appearing for BRS MLA Guntakandla Jagadish Reddy and three others, sought transfer of the trial, saying the Telangana chief minister was also holding the home portfolio and was in-charge of the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB).

"None of the investigative agency officers have been examined. It is the home ministry which decides who is to be examined, who is not," he said.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Mr Reddy, said half of the trial in the case was over and 25 witnesses have already been examined.

Sundaram said none of them were material witnesses and the investigating officer was yet to be examined.

The bench asked the respondents to file their responses to an interlocutory application and posted the matter for hearing after two weeks.

Angry over Mr Reddy's statement about a "deal" between the BJP and the BRS for securing bail for Kavitha, the top court had on August 29 said such statements might create apprehensions in the minds of people.

The court had said it was a fundamental duty of political parties to show respect to institutions.

The observations by the top court had come while hearing the plea seeking transfer of the trial in the case from Telangana to Madhya Pradesh capital Bhopal.

The petitioners have claimed no fair trial in the case was possible in Telangana with Reddy at the helm.

They have said if a criminal trial is not free and fair, the credibility of the criminal justice system would undoubtedly be at stake, eroding the confidence of the common people in the system which would not augur well for society at large.

On January 5, the court had deferred till February the hearing of Revanth Reddy's separate petition challenging the June 1, 2021 order of the high court dismissing his plea questioning the jurisdiction of an ACB court to conduct the trial in the cash-for-vote scam case.

In July 2015, the ACB had filed a charge sheet against Revanth Reddy and others under the Prevention of Corruption Act and section 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code.

The ACB had then claimed it has collected "clinching evidence" against the accused in the form of audio/video recordings, and recovered an advance amount of Rs 50 lakh. 

(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)