Hyderabad: In a setback to senior IAS officer Y Srilakshmi — who was discharged from the OMC illegal mining case in 2022 by the Telangana high court — the Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside that order and directed the high court to hear the case again and decide it afresh within three months.
It may be recalled that the CBI special court on Tuesday convicted Karnataka former minister Gali Janardhan Reddy, Obulapuram mining company MD BV Srinivas Reddy, Gali's PA Mehfuz Ali and VD Rajagopal, the then director of AP mines and geology wing, for the illegal mining of iron ore from Bellary on the AP-Karnataka border. All of them were sentenced to seven years in jail.
CBI, in its chargesheet in 2012, had named Srilakshmi as an accused in the case, alleging that she facilitated the illegal mining of iron ore, which the CBI estimated at 5,000 crore. Srilakshmi had filed a petition seeking to be discharged from the case, contending that she had merely performed her duties as a secretary of the industries department in 2007 while granting mining leases to Gali Janardhan Reddy's OMC. However, the CBI court dismissed her plea and directed her to face trial, stating that she could present her arguments at the time of framing charges.
She then challenged the CBI court's order in the Telangana high court, which, on Nov 8 2022, discharged her from the case.
The CBI challenged this order before the Supreme Court. Incidentally, just 24 hours after the CBI court delivered its judgment, a bench comprising Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Rajesh Bindal took up the CBI's appeal on Wednesday for hearing.
Additional solicitor general (ASG) KM Nataraj contended that the Telangana high court order discharging Srilakshmi lacked any factual basis and failed to provide reasons. The HC, in its 2022 hearing, went to the extent of re-appreciating the evidence — a task reserved for the trial court, the ASG said.
Even the trial court was permitted to do so only during the trial stage and not while hearing discharge petitions, he added. The bench agreed with him and set aside the high court's Nov 2022 order and remanded the matter to the high court, directing it to decide the issue within three months.