Seeking AP High Court to reject former chief minister YS Jaganmohan Reddy’s plea challenging the imposition of strict conditions by the Special Court of People’s Representatives in Vijayawada to issue a No Objection Letter (NOC) in the matter of passport renewal, Public Prosecutor Menda Lakshmi Narayana argued that Jagan avoiding to attend the court.
He said that Jagan is expected to attend the Special Court to renew his passport for one year and submit a self-surety of Rs 20,000, which is reasonable. But, he said that the former chief minister is feeling embarrassed to attend the court to submit surety and is challenging the same in the High Court.
He said that the special court has the authority to impose conditions for the issuance of NOC and requested the High Court not to interfere in these orders. He said that the cases before the CBI court and the case before the special court are different and they cannot be compared.
He said that the court should not seek to modify the order on the ground of inconvenience to the petitioner. He recalled that the High Court did not stay the defamation case. He said that the Court of People’s Representatives has issued a summons to Jagan in the defamation case and he has to attend the hearing on 29th of this month.
He said that the passport authorities have complete authority regarding the issuance and renewal of passports. He recalled that the petitioner had mentioned in the suit filed in the special court that there was no objection to the issuance of the NOC, and there was no point in approaching the High Court on the conditions of the court.
He mentioned that the Supreme Court has given several judgments that the court has the authority to impose conditions for the issuance/renewal of passports while the investigation of criminal cases is pending. He said that Jagan has mentioned in the affidavit for the 2019 and 2024 elections that a defamation case is pending against him.
The court said that it is the responsibility of the police to deliver the summons issued by the special court to the accused (Jagan) in the defamation case. But, it asked what they were doing without serving the summons all this time? Summons not given intentionally? Did the accused get away with not taking them?
