Jagan can’t issue media statements
Tags:
The AP High Court has refused to permit YSR Congress president Jagan Mohan Reddy to communicate with the people from prison through the media. Justice K.C. Bhanu, dealing with a plea by Mr Reddy, pointed out that without a hearing to define the rights of an undertrial prisoner and a convict, it would not be proper to grant an interim relief at this stage. Mr Subrahmanyam Sriram, the counsel for Mr Reddy contended that the AP Prison Rules do not put any restriction on the liberty of the under-trial to communicate to the outside world through letters duly signed by him, and it was not subject to any screening by prison authorities.
Referring to the SC’s directions in the case of PUCL and another versus UOI and also in the case of TATA Press Limited versus MTNL, he argued that unreasonably restricting his client's fundamental right to communicate with the people through the media was unconstitutional. Replying to this argument, advocate-general A. Sudarshan Reddy said that Mr Jagan Mohan Reddy was given special class prisoner status under Rule 737 of the AP Prison Rules and the relevant rule specifies that a special class prisoner is entitled to privileges provided to an ‘A’ class convict.
He said that Rule 1038 did not permit any sort of interview with the prisoner and the action of the jail authorities in restricting Mr Jagan from sending his letter to the media, which had political content, was within the purview of the Rules.
CBI moves HC in Jagan case
The CBI has moved the AP High Court seeking extension of the police custody of YSR Congress president Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy to continue its interrogation in the illegal assets case. Earlier, the HC granted custody of Mr Reddy to the CBI for five days, which ended on June 7. The CBI has sought 10 days custody, but the court allowed it for five days. The court will hear the case on Friday.
court rejects
Teachers’ plea
A division bench comprising acting CJ V. Eswaraiah and Justice N. Ravi Shankar has ruled that contract teachers of residential schools run by the tribal welfare department are not entitled to regularisation of their services in tribal areas. The petitioners had contended that they have been in the service for the past eight years.
Post new comment