The Supreme Court on Wednesday stayed the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s gag order on media reporting and social media comments about a first information report filed by the the state’s Anti-Corruption Bureau against a former legal officer and others over a land purchase matter in Amaravati, reported Bar and Bench.
A bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy and MR Shah passed the order after the YS Jaganmohan Reddy government in Andhra Pradesh challenged the order. The Supreme Court, however, did not interfere with the stay order on investigation into the land deal and said that the High Court shall not decide on the pending matters till January last week, when the matter will be heard next.
The court did not issue notice to Reddy on the appeal but sought responses from others, including the Director General of Police of Andhra Pradesh, and the state’s former advocate general on whose plea the High Court had passed the order, reported PTI.
On September 15, the Andhra Pradesh High Court ordered a stay on the investigation into a land deal in Amaravati. Accepting a plea by the former advocate general, against whom the first information report was registered, the High Court also gagged the media from reporting on the details of the case or its context. Following this, the Andhra Pradesh government challenged the order.
Appearing for the Andhra Pradesh government on Wednesday, Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan pointed out that as soon as the order to investigate the land scam was passed on September 8, a writ petition was filed seeking a gag against media coverage and the order was passed on the same day. “What is so extraordinarily special that such an order has to be passed?” Dhavan said.
He argued against the submissions in the writ petition alleging “political malafide” on part of the Reddy government. He further pointed out that the plea was not filed to stop the investigation altogether, but to do so only against the advocate general.
Responding to Dhavan’s arguments, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for the former advocate general, informed the Court that the FIR was not registered when the writ petition was filed. He alleged that the government had leaked the FIR to the media in an attempt to malign the former the advocate general’s reputation and hence the matter was heard expeditiously.
Also read:
Not just gagging reporting on land deal, Andhra Pradesh High Court even stays investigation
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!