Did Telangana HC Quash SC/ST Case Against CM Revanth Reddy?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
In a major legal victory, Telangana Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy has had a case dismissed by the High Court. This decision highlights the complexities of legal challenges faced by politicians. Read on to explore the details surrounding this significant ruling that could reshape political dynamics in the region.
Key Takeaways
- The Telangana High Court quashed the case against CM A. Revanth Reddy.
- The court found no substantial evidence against him.
- The case was politically charged and raised questions about legal integrity.
- Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya emphasized the need for solid evidence in convictions.
- This ruling may impact political dynamics in Telangana.
Hyderabad, July 17 (NationPress) In a significant development, the Telangana High Court has provided relief to Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy by quashing a case filed against him under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act on Thursday. The court announced its decision after reserving orders on the Chief Minister's petition on June 20.
The case, initiated in 2019, involved allegations against Revanth Reddy, his brother Kondal Reddy, and another individual for purportedly abusing N. Peddi Raju, Director of the Razole Constituency SC Mutually Aided Cooperative Housing Society Limited, based on his caste.
Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya ruled to quash the First Information Report (FIR) due to a lack of evidence linking the accused to the incident. The judge highlighted that the complaint was solely based on allegations, which are insufficient for a conviction without proof of the accused's presence at the location of the supposed offense.
The FIR pertains to a land dispute involving 31 acres in Survey No. 127 of Gopanpally village. The complainant asserted that Revanth Reddy's brothers, A. Kondal Reddy and E. Lakshmaiah, encroached on the land with Revanth Reddy's backing during his tenure as an MP.
The complainant also claimed he faced caste-based insults and that structures on the disputed land were demolished using a JCB machine.
As a result of the complaint, a case was filed in 2016 at the Gachibowli Police Station of the Cyberabad Commissionerate, with Revanth Reddy named as the third accused.
The FIR included charges under sections 447, 427, 506 r/w 34 r/w 198, 120-b of the IPC and Sections (3) (1) (f) (g) (r) & (s) (va) of the SS/ST (POA) Act, 2016.
The case was under trial before the Special Sessions Judge for Cases under SCs/STs POA Act cum VII Additional District Sessions Judge in Rangareddy district.
Revanth Reddy sought the High Court's intervention in 2020, aiming to quash the FIR and related proceedings, arguing that the case was politically motivated and lacked substance.
During the hearing, Palle Nageshwar Rao, public prosecutor representing the state government, informed the court that the investigating officer had interrogated eight witnesses and documented their statements. None of the witnesses confirmed Revanth Reddy's presence at the incident site.
Point of View
The ruling by the Telangana High Court reflects the ongoing tension between legal proceedings and political motivations. It raises questions about the integrity of allegations made against public figures and the broader implications for justice in politically charged environments. The case underscores the importance of evidence in legal processes, ensuring that justice prevails.
NationPress
17/07/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the basis for quashing the case against Revanth Reddy?
The Telangana High Court quashed the case due to a lack of evidence linking Revanth Reddy to the alleged incident.
When was the case originally filed?
The case against Revanth Reddy was filed in 2019.
What allegations were made against the Chief Minister?
He was accused of abusing N. Peddi Raju based on his caste during a land dispute.
What did the court say about the evidence presented?
Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya stated that the prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence to link the accused to the crime.
What sections of the law were invoked in this case?
The FIR included charges under various sections of the IPC and the SS/ST (POA) Act, 2016.
