Vizag doctor sent to jail in kidney sale case

kidney tradeThe director of a private hospital in Vishakhapatnam, arrested in an alleged kidney sale case, was brought to Cuttack and sent to jail for two weeks by a local court today.

The Vizag-based hospital director 58-year-old N Prabhakar Babu was brought to Cuttack last evening on transit remand and produced before a lower court where his bail application was rejected and he was remanded to 14 days judicial custody.

Babu was arrested by a team of Cuttack police on June 17 from his hospital complex for alleged illegal kidney sale case involving a Cuttack woman, police sources said.

The hospital had allegedly removed a kidney of the woman and transplanted it on a young man in April this year in which both the donor and recipient were fraudulently shown as wife and husband, they said.

The city police had arrested Babu under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and violation of Transplantation of Human Organ Act of 1994.

However, the Cuttack police had failed to immediately bring the doctor here after he was taken ill soon after his arrest. Following a direction of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, Dr Babu was brought to Cuttack on remand for five days after his arrest.

(Source: PTI)

Daiichi plea HC to vacate Sun-Ranbaxy merger stay

DaiichiDaiichi Sankyo, owner of Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited, has filed a petition in Andhra Pradesh High Court requesting it to vacate the ‘status quo’ order it issued earlier on Sun Pharma-Ranbaxy merger process.

The HC may take up hearing on the petition on May 15.

Based on a petition filed by two individual investors, the court on April 25, issued interim ‘status quo’ orders on the merger process.

The petitioners alleged that there was heavy trading of Ranbaxy stock before the merger with Sun Pharma was announced on April 6, and requested the court to direct the SEBI to investigate the insider trading of Ranbaxy shares and take appropriate action against Sun Pharma and Silver Street.

Daiichi, in its petition filed last week requesting the court to vacate its earlier order, contended that the petitioners (investors) had approached the court without exhausting the alternative remedies.

The Japanese drug major also pointed that various courts in the past have acknowledged that Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is the appropriate and competent body to look into matters such as insider trading.

“I submit the present petition (filed by investors) is not maintainable because the petitioners have approached this honourable court without exhausting any of the alternative remedies available to the petitioners and all such alternative remediates and effective efficacious.

“I submit that respondent one (SEBI) is an expert body constituted under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (the SEBI Act), and an investigation involving an allegation of insider trading is highly technical, requires professional expertise, deep knowledge of securities law, and is a fact-based finding,” Daiichi said.

The drug maker also said that the petitioners have intermingled two separate issues – insider trading and merger process of Sun Pharma and Ranbaxy.

“It is submitted that the two issues are independent of each other and one has no bearing on other. It is submitted that the allegations in the writ petition pertain alleged charges of insider trading only. The petitioners have not made any amendments in the writ petition against the scheme of this arrangement,” it said.

Mumbai-based Sun Pharma had announced on April 6 that it would fully acquire Ranbaxy in an all stock transaction with a total equity value of USD 3.2 billion, along with debt of USD 800 million taking the overall deal value to USD 4 billion.

The combination of Sun Pharma and Ranbaxy creates the fifth-largest speciality generics company in the world and the largest pharmaceutical company in India.

Daiichi requested the court to dismiss the writ petition filed by the investors and also pass order vacating the status quo order.

(Source: PTI)

Court dismisses Andhra police chief’s plea for extension

The Andhra Pradesh High Court Sunday dismissed a petition by state police chief V. Dinesh Reddy seeking orders to the state government to extend his term by one year.

A division bench, which heard the motion moved by the director general of police (DGP), directed him to relinquish his post. Reddy is attaining the age of superannuation on Monday.

Dinesh Reddy had challenged the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) that declined to grant him interim relief to continue in the post till his plea seeking a term of one more year was disposed of by the Tribunal.

The CAT, however, admitted the original petition and granted four weeks to the government to file a counter affidavit.

The government had last week conveyed to the CAT that it will not extend Dinesh Reddy’s term. Challenging the government’s decision, he had filed a petition in the CAT but it refused to grant him interim relief.

Dinesh Reddy, a 1977 batch Indian Police Service (IPS) officer, was re-appointed DGP in September last year after the high court had quashed his appointment following a petition filed by fellow IPS officer P. Gautam Kumar.

It was in June 2011 that Dinesh Reddy was first appointed DGP, superseding five other IPS officers.

The Supreme Court recently directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe the assets of Dinesh Reddy following a petition filed by another IPS officer Umesh Kumar.

(Source: IANS)

Andhra court rejects Janardhana Reddy’s bail plea

The Andhra Pradesh High Court Thursday dismissed the bail petitions of former Karnataka minister Gali Janardhana Reddy and managing director of Obulapuram Mining Company (OMC) B.V. Srinivasa Reddy in an illegal mining case.


Justice K.G. Shankar, who had reserved his order last Friday, pronounced the ruling rejecting the bail petitions of both the accused.

The court agreed with the CBI’s argument that if released on bail, the accused could influence the witnesses and hamper the probe.

 They were arrested by the CBI from their home town Bellary in Karnataka in September 2011.

The case relates to illegal mining of iron ore in Anantapur district of Andhra Pradesh by OMC owned by Janardhana Reddy.

Janardhana Reddy is also an accused in cash for bail scam. He is accused of bribing a judge of the CBI court to get bail in OMC case. The Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) of Andhra Pradesh last year arrested the judge, his son and several others in the sensational case.

The former Karnataka minister is also an accused in another illegal mining case in Karnataka.

(Source:IANS)

SC denies bail to Jaganmohan Reddy’s conduit

The bail plea of one of the alleged conduits of YSR Congress chief Jaganmohan Reddy has dismissed by the Supreme Court of India, arrested for their alleged role in a corruption case, saying “white collar crimes” are rising in India and such economic offences poses a “serious threat”.

The plea Nimmagadda Prasad has rejected by the apex court who has been named as one of the accused along with Reddy in the graft case and is in judicial custody since his arrest on May 15 last year.

Prasad had approached the apex court against an order by the Andhra Pradesh High Court which had dismissed his bail plea in October last year.

A bench comprising Justices P Sathasivam and M Y Eqbal dismissed Prasad’s plea saying such economic offences have “serious repercussions” on the development of the country.

“Unfortunately, in the last few years, the country has been seeing an alarming rise in white-collar crimes, which has affected the fiber of the country’s economic structure. Incontrovertibly, economic offences have serious repercussions on the development of the country as a whole,” according to the bench.

“Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offence, having deep rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds, needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing a serious threat to the financial health of the country,” according to it.

Naxal leader moves Delhi HC for bail

Naxal leader Kobad Ghandy has been moved an application at Delhi High Court seeking bail on the grounds that he has already been granted the same relief by Andhra Pradesh High Court in a case.

Kobad Ghandy was arrested and jailed for allegedly setting up a base for the banned CPI(Maoist).

Sixty five-year-old Ghandy, who was arrested on September 20, 2009 by the Special Cell of Delhi Police, filed a copy of the bail order delivered by the AP High Court before Justice Sunil Gaur.

The court, which had earlier issued a notice to Delhi Police on the bail application of Ghandy, on Thursday, however, deferred the hearing to May 16 after the counsel for the police said he was not prepared to argue.

Ghandy’s advocate Rebecca John placed on record the order of the AP High Court, which granted him bail in a case of killing of nine persons, including senior Congress leader Chittem Narsi Reddy, in the southern state.

Reddy and eight others were allegedly killed by the Maoists in Narayanapet in Mahbubnagar on August 15, 2005.

Ghandy has been booked by Delhi Police under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and IPC for a series of offences, which includes impersonation, cheating and forgery.

Andhra Pradesh HC adjourns hearing on Polavaram tenders issue

The Andhra Pradesh High Court adjourned till March 25 hearing on a petition filed by the SOMA-CGG heading the Joint Venture which challenged the action of the state government in processing the application of its competitor Transitory- JSC EC UES for Polavaram irrigation project tenders.

Mr Justice R Subash Reddy earlier directed the state government to furnish copies of all the evaluation reports of the technical experts who visited Russia and China to evaluate the claims of competing firms who have filed tenders for construction of the project, to the petitioners.

When the case came up for hearing then, the government informed the court that there was still time to finalise the tenders. The Petitioner complained that the government had acted in a hurry without informing the court and entered into an agreement.

The Petitioner also sought copy of the recommendation of the high power committee.

AP Judicial Academy to support MSMEs on legal issues : Justice Ramana

“The judicial academy is open to serve the industry especially the small scale industries to provide required legal support in their businesses” according to the Andhra Pradesh High Court Acting Chief Justice Justice N V Ramana.

In his inaugural address at the annual meeting on ‘Andhra Pradesh-Reviving Economic Growth through focus on skills, Innovation, Rurbanization and Infrastructure’, organised by CII (Andhra) here, Justice Ramana pointed out that the Judiciary is friendly with the industry and Judicial Academy is open to serve the industry, especially the SSIs to provide them with the required legal support for establishing and strengthening their businesses.

‘Judiciary never forgot the welfare of the industry and the Judicial Academy is equipped to train the industry officials on various judicial issues, which they could come across, he also mentioned.

Justice Ramana also emphasised the need for diverting the Industry CSR activities also towards conservation of energy, which will have more meaningful impact.

Mr Ramana also emphasised the need to encourage entrepreneurship in the state.

Indecent allegations against spouse amount to cruelty: SC

Filing complaints and making indecent allegations against spouses can be ground for granting divorce, the Supreme Court ruled while holding that staying together is not a pre-condition for causing mental cruelty to a life partner.

The apex court set side the verdict of Andhra Pradesh High Court which held that there is no question of causing cruelty to spouse if husband-wife do not stay together.

“In our opinion, the high court wrongly held that because the husband and the wife did not stay together there is no question of the parties causing cruelty to each other. Staying together under the same roof is not a pre-condition for mental cruelty. Spouse can cause mental cruelty by his or her conduct even while he or she is not staying under the same roof,” the court mentioned.

A bench of justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana Prakash Desai granted divorce to a couple who were living separately for the last 10 years, from just a day after their marriage.

The bench noted that in this case the wife had made indecent and defamatory allegations about her husband and in-laws while living separately and said that it amounted to causing mental cruelty to her spouse.

“While staying away, a spouse can cause mental cruelty to the other spouse by sending vulgar and defamatory letters or notices or filing complaints containing indecent allegations or by initiating number of judicial proceedings making the other spouse’s life miserable. This is what has happened in this case,” according to the bench.

The apex court passed the order on an appeal filed by the husband challenging the high court’s verdict for dismissing his plea of divorce on the ground of cruelty.

After going through the facts of the case, the Supreme Court came to the conclusion that there is unbridgeable distance between the two and said, “If we refuse to sever the tie, it may lead to mental cruelty.

“Making unfounded indecent defamatory allegations against the spouse or his or her relatives in the pleadings, filing of complaints or issuing notices or news items which may have adverse impact on the business prospect or the job of the spouse and filing repeated false complaints and cases in the court against the spouse would, in the facts of a case, amount to causing mental cruelty to the other spouse.”

It turned down the plea of the wife who expressed desire to live with her husband.

“A marriage which is dead for all purposes cannot be revived by the court verdict, if the parties are not willing.

This is because marriage involves human sentiments and emotions and if they are dried-up there is hardly any chance of their springing back to life on account of artificial reunion created by the court’s decree.

“The conduct of the wife in filing a complaint making unfounded, indecent and defamatory allegation against her mother-in-law, in filing revision seeking enhancement of the sentence awarded to the husband, in filing appeal questioning the acquittal of the husband and acquittal of his parents indicates that she made all attempts to ensure that he and his parents are put in jail and he is removed from his job.

We have no manner of doubt that this conduct has caused mental cruelty to the appellant-husband,” the bench told.

DA case: High Court dismisses Reddy’s bail plea

As the Andhra Pradesh high court dashed Jaganmohan Reddy hopes by rejecting his statutory bail petition in connection with his alleged disproportionate assets case, YSR Congress party president YS Jaganmohan Reddy would have to stay away from Christmas celebrations.

Justice B Seshasayana Reddy, who reserved his judgment on Thursday last after prolonged hearings, dismissed the bail petition of Jagan, who had contended that the CBI had not filed a charge-sheet within the prescribed time of 90 days and hence he deserved the bail.

The CBI argued that the issue of statutory bail was argued at length in Supreme Court and he could not raise the issue again. It said Jagan had been arrested in connection with the quid pro quo deal with the VANPIC project promoters and not yet in other aspects. The agency reminded that it had not sought the extension of his judicial custody after August 14 and hence granting bail under Section 167 could not be considered.

The judge agreed with the contention of the CBI that granting bail at this stage of pending investigation would not only impede the investigation, but also infringe the avowed purpose set out by the Supreme Court in its order.  He further posted hearings on Jagan’s petition for a regular bail to December 26.

The high court’s decision came as a big setback to Jagan’s family which was hoping that he would among the family members for Christmas celebrations. His sister Sharmila, who had to suspend her marathon padyatra due to a torn ligament, is already back in Hyderabad along with her evangelist husband Anil Kumar. “It is for the first time that Jagan will be missing in the family to celebrate Christmas. It is really a terrible feeling for the family,” a YSR Congress party leader observed.

Jagan, who was arrested on May 27 this year by CBI on corruption charges, is presently under judicial remand at the Chanchalguda jail.

Interestingly, former minister for excise Mopidevi Venkataramana who had also been in the same jail in connection with the Jagan’s case, was granted conditional bail on Monday to enable him to visit Ayyappa temple at Sabarimalai in Kerala. He was asked to report back to the court on January 3.

Meanwhile, the YSR Congress party leaders have launched a massive campaign of collecting one crore signatures demanding release of Jagan, as part of their strategy to mobilise public support to the party.

According to party leaders, a representation with one crore signatures of people of various sections, would be submitted to President of India Pranab Mukherjee, who would be coming to Andhra Pradesh on December 27.  Former MP and and party’s ST wing chairman Ravindra Naik affixed the first signature on the petition followed by others.  “The people are anguished over the way Jagan was implicated in false cases and has been kept in jail for the last 200 days. The CBI is making every effort to show that Jagan is a culprit. We strongly condemn this conspiracy,” the party leaders said in a statement.