The CBI informed the special court on Wednesday that it had also included the names of ministers in the illegal assets case against the YSR Congress chief Y S Jaganmohan Reddy.
Both Jagan and his auditor Vijaya Sai Reddy filed memos in the court separately. Arguments were concluded on the memos on Wednesday. The court posted its decision to April 27.
Arguing the case on behalf of the CBI, Ashok Bhan said that there was evidence of quid pro quo operations and the agency had already included the names of some ministers. Stating that the agency had already filed 5 chargesheets, investigation was continuing on six more aspects, he added. He said scrutiny of three of them were being held and soon chargesheets on them would be filed. He contended that Jagan and Vijaya Sai had filed the memos only to obstruct the process of filing the charge-sheets.
Stating that Jagan’s offences were economic crimes of serious nature and hence would take some more time. He told the court that already two ministers were named accused and the name of another minister was also freshly included. He said there were clear instructions from the high court to probe into all aspects. He has alleged that corporate colour was given to legalize illegally earned money.
Ashok Bhan said Vijaya Sai played a key role in the case and added that public interest was of supreme importance in the case. He also maintained that the investigation was proceeding in a transparent manner. He said Vijaya Sai acted as a go-between in getting investments into Jagan’s companies. He also charged Vijaya Sai of threatening the investors. He said Jagan and Vijaya Sai could not be seen as different entities and maintained that the two were two sides of the same coin.
CBI counsel asserted that Jagan could not escape from the case. He also reminded that the agency had included an important minister in the Dalmia charge-sheet. He said there was no legality for the request of the accused to stop the filing of charges. He said it was not possible to hear all the charges at once and added that some fictitious companies were created to facilitate illegal investments.
The CBI counsel also maintained that the directions of the Supreme Court were not violated.
After hearing the arguments of both sides the court posted its judgment to April 27.