Amaravati: A couple of orders moved by this High Court(H.C) have moved the hornet’s nest, deepening the gulf between legislature & judiciary in AP.
Within the 1st order the court granted stay on the constitution of a cabinet sub-committee to review the key decisions of the recent TDP govt & Special Inquiry Tandem (SIT) to probe the land deals. Within the next order the High Court(H.C) slapped a blanket ban on media involving social media(SM) from reporting on the contents of the 1st info record (FIR) registered by this Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) involving a previous Advocate Gen. of the AP & remaining who contain 2 daughters of the senior-most sitting judge of the Supreme Court.
The court orders sparked a discussion in political, legal & media circles on powers & restrictions of the legislature vis-à-vis the judiciary. The orders also given a stuff for conversation on whether some of the citizens by virtue of their own position & connections with the powers-that- be are given immunity from that so called media trial, investigation & inquiry of the probe agencies be scuttled to the advantage of the charged within the complaint. The judicial orders granting immunity to previous Advocate Gen. of the govt of AP Dammalapati Srinivas & remaining who included 2 daughters of the senior-most sitting judge of the Supreme Court framed within the ACB’s FIR, from media coverage had come in comparison with movie actress Rakul Preet Singh who has been subjected to media trial within the complaint of suicide by star Sushant Singh Rajput. The order intending to gag the media is uncalled for & in contravention of freedom of speech assured under Article 19 of the constitution.
The Yuvajana Sramika Rytu Congress Party (YSRC) headed by Y.S. Jaganmohan Reddy won the elections by mostly campaigning over omissions & commissions of the TDP govt. Thus, Jagan’s party contends that it’s got (1) citizens’s mandate to review the policies & programs of the recent govt & that judicial has no character in its mission to realize the citizens’s mandate.
The Jaganmohan Reddy govt that swept to power with a massive mandate early in 2019 in AP started to rise severe queries over the impartiality of the judiciary after it got a show of adverse judgements on a slew of its decisions. It’s estimated that the High Court(H.C) has released up to 70 orders negating the key decisions of the govt within the last 1 & a half yr.. Sacking of the AP State Election Commissioner N. Ramesh Kumar, introduction of English as a medium of guideline in govt educational institutions, challenging the SEC’s call to postpone the elections for the urban & regional bodies, shifting of capital out of Amaravati are some to name that are struck down by this courts.
Armed with the privileges under clause (1) & (2) of the 105 of the Constitution, YSRCP’s floor leader within the Lok Sabha Midhun Reddy emphasised his own right to free speech & stated his own party has no confidence within the judiciary as numerous of the lawyers who have been aligned with the TDP in the last are becoming judges of the High Court(H.C) & the Supreme Court. He even named for radical shifts within the selection procedure for appointment of judges. TDP’s previous minister Yanamala Ramakrishnudu countered the YSRC’s argument informing the parties in power with the strength of citizens’s mandate can’t operate the govts in their own going to. Their own actions have to be responsible to the law of the land & stand scrutiny to the court of law, he asserted