SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(AP) 172

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, G.ROHINI
Y. S. Vijaya – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Home – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sushil Kumar, Senior Counsel for Kasa Jaganmohan Reddy, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, Ponnam Ashok Goud, Assistant Solicitor General of India , R2, 3 & 6, Government Pleader for Home, R4, P. Keshava Rao, Standing Counsel for CBI, R5, V. Gopala Krishna Gokhaley, R7, M.S. Ramachandra Rao, R8, 9 & 10, A.K. Ganguly, Senior Counsel for Sri Srinivas Dammalapati, R11 & 12, Anil B. Divan, Senior Counsel for B. Nalin Kumar, R15, K. Ramakrsihna Reddy, Senior Counsel for D. Srinivasa Rao, R16, K. Srinivasa Reddy, R17, D. Prakash Reddy, Senior Counsel for Sri P. Radhive Reddy, R18, D. Prakash Reddy, Senior Counsel for Harinder Prasad, R19, Ch. Pushyam Kiran, R20, C. Ramachandra Raju, R21, Harish Salve, Senior Counsel for D. Seshadri Naidu, M. Manohar Reddy, S. Sri Ram, Advocates.

Judgment :

G. Rohini, J.

This writ petition is filed by way of public interest litigation seeking a Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents 1 to 6 in initiating penal action against the respondent No.8 and his associates i.e., respondents 9 to 20 under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Money Laundering Act, 2002 and other applicable penal laws is illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 6 to initiate proceedings under law including a direction to the respondent No.4 to conduct an investigation / probe in respect of allotment of lands, granting of licenses, decisions of disinvestment and amassing disproportionate wealth and assets by the respondents 8 to 10 and the involvement of the respondents 11 to 20 and prosecute the unofficial respondents and others in accordance with law.

Pending disposal of the writ petition, the petitioner sought an interim direction to the respondent No.4 to conduct a preliminary enquiry into the subject matter and submit a preliminary enquiry report to this Hon’ble Court in regard to the acts of omission and commission of the respondent No.8 during his tenure as Chief Minister of the State i













































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top