Viveka murder case: Avinash Reddy approaches Telangana HC seeking stay on CBI questioning

Vivekananda Reddy was the paternal uncle of current Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy and brother of late Congress strongman and former chief minister YS Rajasekhara Reddy.

He was found dead with injuries under suspicious circumstances at his Pulivendula residence on 15 March, 2019, days before the Lok Sabha elections.

Related: Telangana HC rejects Sunil Yadav bail in Viveka murder case

Allegations against CBI

Avinash Reddy on Thursday also sought direction to the CBI not to take any coercive steps like arresting him.

In the writ petition, Avinash Redy added that the probe being conducted by the CBI’s investigating officer was not fair and impartial.

He also said that accused number four, Viveka’s then-driver Shaik Dastagiri, was not arrested in the case and the CBI had not opposed the anticipatory bail plea he filed. He said the CBI was conducting the investigation based on the statements made by Dastagiri, which itself was hearsay at various points.

An attempt was being made to frame him in the case, though he was nowhere connected to it, Avinash Reddy said.

Avinash Reddy also said that there was nothing on record to substantiate the allegation that he was in any way complicit in committing any offence, much less the offence of killing Viveka.

“It is submitted that the investigation being conducted by the IO is not fair and impartial and there is material to conclude that from the beginning I am being implicated in the crime without there being any admissible evidence and by only twisting facts to frame me as being culpable for the crime,” Avinash Reddy said in the petition.

The court is expected to hear the matter on Friday.

Also read: ₹40 crore ‘supari’ in Viveka murder case, CBI tells Telangana HC

‘CBI team leaking info’

Avinash Reddy also alleged that the CBI’s investigation team had been leaking details of the examination of witnesses in real time to news outlets.

He added that these leaks were being used to speculate wildly about the direction and possible outcomes of the investigation.

“To illustrate the same, it is submitted that while my examination was underway on 28 January and 24 February, vernacular TV channels were broadcasting live the questions being put to me and the documents being used to confront me by the IO,” said Avinash Reddy.

“It is submitted that there is no plausible explanation for the source of such broadcast other than the leaking of such examination details by the IO and his team. It is well established that leaking investigation details to the media seriously prejudices the right of an individual to fair investigation and trial,” he said.

The previous interrogation

Avinash Reddy recently received notice from the CBI for the third time. He attended the questioning by the CBI twice earlier at its office in Koti. The second time was on 24 February.

That day, the CBI grilled Avinash Reddy for over four hours. He told reporters after appearing before the CBI that he informed the probe agency of everything to the best of his knowledge.

Asked why the CBI was “targeting” him, Avinash Reddy said the investigation was proceeding to target one person rather than ferreting out the truth since the beginning of the case.

He also found fault with the media trial when the investigation was going on. The ongoing investigation would be influenced because of it, he said, urging news outlets to act responsibly while telecasting reports.

“Whatever was spoken by the TDP a year ago has figured in the counter-petition filed by the CBI,” he said, adding that the investigation was going on in a partisan manner.

He said he submitted a representation with facts related to the case and requested the CBI to look into it.

(The story has been updated with additional details)