The police opposed former YCP Minister Jogi Ramesh’s bail plea in the AP High Court, as he is not cooperative in the investigation related to the attack on chief minister Chandrababu Naidu’s house.
Senior advocate Siddhartha Luthra, on behalf of the police, argued in the High Court that former Additional AG Ponnavolu Sudhakar Reddy, who was sitting next to him, was answering the questions asked to former minister Jogi Ramesh during the investigation regarding the case of mob attack.
The related video has been placed before the court and asked to examine it. Luthra said that this video is proof that he is not cooperating with the investigation. He said that during the YCP regime misusing the power, he avoided arrest and abused court orders.
When the police asked about the details of the cell phone, SIM number, IMEI number, phone bills, etc., used during the attack, Jogi Ramesh gave an evasive answer saying ‘I don’t know, I don’t remember’ in response to most of the questions. He refused to hand over the phones to the police.
Senior advocate Ponnavolu, who is arguing in Jogi Ramesh’s bail petition in the High Court, is said to be obstructing the police investigation by attending along with Jogi Ramesh. He said that he had never seen a lawyer standing by the side of the accused and answering the questions asked by the police during the investigation.
He said that the conspiracy behind the attack on Chandrababu’s house has to be solved. He said that they misused the power during the YCP regime and registered minor sections in the case of the attack incident, but SCST case was registered against the leaders and victims who were in the opposition then.
The investigation was watered down. In this regard, the case diary with evidence has been placed before the court and asked to examine them. He said that if the bail is given at the present stage when the investigation is going on actively, the process will be hindered. Taking into account Jogi Ramesh’s conduct, the anticipatory bail petition filed by him was sought to be dismissed.
As the arguments on behalf of the police ended, the hearing was adjourned to Friday for the reply arguments on behalf of the petitioner. High Court judge Justice VRK Kripasagar gave the order to this effect. The judge examined the video submitted by the police to the court.
