HC gag order on Amaravati land scam case


The Andhra Pradesh High Court on late Tuesday issued an injunction against any reporting by the media on the contents of the First Information Report (FIR) with regard to corruption charges against several people in the Amaravati land scam.

The High Court, in its order, stated, “It is directed that the news in regard to registration of FIR or in the context of the said FIR shall not be made public in any electronic, print or social media, to foist the office of a former Advocate General and also with respect to the other alleged accused persons.”

Earlier, the Jagan government had urged the central government to order a Central Bureau of Investigation probe into the alleged land scam in the Amaravati capital region, during the previous TDP regime.

Chief Minister Jagan Mohan Reddy also instructed his MPs to rake up the issue in the ongoing Parliament session.

The YSRCP had accused the previous TDP government of insider trading that allegedly former chief minister N Chandrababu Naidu, his family members, and those close to them.

The YSRCP’s bone of contention was that 4,070 acres of land were purchased in Krishna and Guntur districts by those involved in insider trading before the announcement of Amaravati as the state capital.

Telugu360 is always open for the best and bright journalists. If you are interested in full-time or freelance, email us at Krishna@telugu360.com.


  1. Open letter to CJI/SC:


    Investigating Agencies: For example, AP High Court ordered CBI to enquire corruption charges on two politicians based on the cases filed by two different politicians. CBI moves in to one politician case at Supersonic speed and in the case of another politician, the case file simply dumped in a cupboard saying that no staff instead of distributing staff for the two cases. This is known as criminal justice, adopted by enquiry agencies in majority of the cases. We have seen also criminal cases against the investigating agencies personal.
    Retired Judges: Media presented observations made by Union Law Minister Kapil Sibbal on 12th February 2014 and Chief Justice of India P. Sathasivam on 13th February 2014 at a seminar to mark the golden jubilee of the Central Vigilance Commission. The report states that “Countering Union Law Minister Kapil Sibal’s statement that the process of accountability in the judiciary is exceptionally weak, Chief Justice of India P. Sathasivam said that a mechanism had already been put in place to deal with complaints against judges, and that no request of the government or any of its agencies was pending in the Supreme Court”.
    In India crores of young boys and girls not getting jobs and yet, most of the judges after retirement get plum posts that fetches them plenty of money; and thus justice is sold. However, neither the Law Minister Kapil Sibal nor Chief Justice of India Mr. P. Sathasivam touched upon the retired judges holding important positions. For example, Central government appointed Judges for Krishna River Water Distribution Tribunal. They submitted an award on 30-12-2010/final award in 29-11-2013. I found it is a “Technical Fraud” award. The same I sent to successive Chief Justices of India [13th February 2013 to 17th October 2014]. No action was taken on the award or on the judges who prepared the award but the tribunal was given extension six times. I don’t know under what category such case comes – criminal or ???.
    Judges: September 13, 2020 print media report: The country’s two top judges — Chief Justice of India S. A. Bobde and next in line Justice N. V. Ramana – said judges are often soft targets of vituperative criticism in social media as they are trained to exercise restraint and do not have recourse to unbridled free speech like their critics. Let us see the validity of such statement.

    dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

  2. (a) I was a member of APPCB task force committee [at legal hearings – dealt thousands of cases]. Based on Supreme Court order [December 2000], the committee assessed and closed all the polluting industries in a restricted area [protected by a GO]. However, the committee found several polluting industries are in operation in that zone without consent from APPCB – that is, illegally operating. In this around 60 are batteries related small scale industries but causing serious pollution. The committee gave time on several occasions to shift them outside the specified zone. They did not bother on the orders. Finally at a legal hearing closed all of them. They approached advocate; and a group of advocates filed the cases in AP High Court. The court issued stop order. These types of stay orders are rampant to serve the political interests.
    (b) Environmental groups filed a PIL in AP High Court relating to state government initiating a project against the same GO and the same Supreme Court order. The High Court bench did not bothered to look in to the poor quality EIA or GO & Supreme Court order and supported bad action of government. I myself filed another PIL in AP High Court relating to violations of GO & Supreme Court order – before that I met CBI officials. They discussed with me for nearly four hours and took copies of reports and at the end said “sorry we can’t help in this case” –. The government submitted memo upholding the GO & Supreme Court order; but failed to stop the illegal activities against GO and Supreme Court order. The government also submitted to the court that they will bring out “Lake Protection Authority” but instead brought out “Lake Protection Committee” with no action. In fact Justice Ramana, just before he was leaving to take Supreme Court Judge-post, he asked the government whether you appoint the Judge or you want me to do that; but afterwards nothing happened to date. – Several PILs have been filed on lakes encroachments/protection. Now that area turned in to practicall barren land!!!
    (c) In the above issue, two benches presented contradicting judgments. The former bench favored the interests of government and the later favored protecting the environment/natural resources. So, do Justice Bobde and Justice Ramana think judges are now soft targets in the social media?
    (d) There are few good judges and more bad judges like in all sections. We have to accept this. Same is the case with investigating agencies.
    (e) In such scenario, the Justice Ramana bench before asking the Centre a reply in six weeks should have studied issues by itself or through a committee and presented to the government on the wide range of pros and cons of the issues.
    (f) Also, the bench needs to present clarity on the “not before me”, “Quid Pro Co”, Stop order; Collegium System, etc.

    Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy

  3. Tail point: Such things are not only confined to Indian Systems but are seen in international reputed systems. For example, IPCC a UN body presented in its report that Himalayan glaciers will melt by 2035. When we questioned on the veracity of such conclusion, the head of IPCC said it is voodoo science. Just few days later after receiving Nobel Prize, IPCC admits glacier goof-up and said that the Himalayan Glaciers won’t melt by 2035 and expressed regret for erring on the Himalayan Glaciers and deleted the text from the report. Al Gore the co-winner of Nobel Prize also withdrew his conclusion on Greenland will be ice free in 5 years. But, none of them returned the Nobel Prize!!! Water Resources Minister of India on May 2020 said that the snow this year on “Himalayan Peaks” is the highest in 50 years, and reservoirs in downstream will receive very high water inflows from snowmelt during summer and southwest monsoon. In fact the situation is similar to massive floods in last year, but on a bigger scale. We are still fighting against several issues of IPCC that costs trillions of dollars. Based on such poor quality reports cases are filed in courts costing millions of dollars.
    Dr. S. Jeevananda Reddy


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here