YS Jagan Mohan Reddy expressed grief over the demise of Sri Shanti SwaroopA Peep Into CM Jagan’s Heart Of Gold!YS Jagan Mohan Reddy expressed delight over Bharat Ratna awardsAP Leads From the Forefront Disbursing Over Rs 4 Lakh Crore to the Poor via DBTYSRCP's Impactful Welfare MeasuresYSRCP Highlights Plight of Dalits During Naidu's RuleTDP, a BC Leader Factory, Yet No Representation in Rajya Sabha – Why?Invested Rs 1,600 crore dedicatedly for the development of Kodur‘Real development is providing quality education to poor and investing in human capital,’Samajika Sadhikara bus yatra in Araku Valley, Anantapur
Vanpic case not part of Jagan case:CBI
28 Sep 2012 2:27 AM
As the AP High Court continued to hear the bail petition of Vanpic (Vadarevu and Nizampatnam Port and Industrial Corridor) case accused Nimmagadda Prasad, more facts about the ‘no relation’ of YSR Congress Party president Y.S.Jagan Mohan Reddy to the case are coming out.
CBI counsel Kesavara Rao told the High Court on Thursday that the Vanpic case is completely different from the Jagan properties case. It may be recalled that the CBI counsel informed Justice Samudrala Govindarajulu on Wednesday that Jagan had nothing to do with the Vanpic case.
On the third day of hearing of the bail petition of Nimmagadda Prasad, the judge asked CBI counsel whether the case filed against Nimmagadda Prasad is part of the Jagan properties case. To this, counsel Kesava Rao said ‘this is different case.
The CBI counsel minced his words when the judge asked if the Government had suffered any loss after the Navayuga group joined as partner in the Vanpic project. There was no reply from the counsel when Justice Govindarajulu said any business partnership agreement would be subject to the main agreement entered into by the two governments and asked if there was any violation.
Objecting to the bail for Nimmagadda Prasad, CBI counsel said they have issued notice to the representatives of RAC (Rasal Al Khaima) but there was no response from them. “If bail is given to Nimmagadda, he will influence the witnesses who are employees in the Vanpic,” said the counsel.
The counsel replied he had no readymade information when the judge wanted to know the number of employees listed as witnesses. Justice Govindarajulu also objected when the counsel went on repeating the same old story of quid pro quo allegations.
(Updated on Sept 28, 2012)