PNS | Vijayawada
In a courtroom filled with tension, the legal battle surrounding TDP chief Chandrababu Naidu took a dramatic turn as a petition for his production warrant in the Fibernet case was issued, with the court summoning him for a hearing on Monday, as requested by the CID. The CID also sought judicial custody for Naidu. The court’s proceedings addressed a pending petition concerning the request for call records of police officials and a potential media gag order.
Government lawyers representing the State were subjected to aggression from lawyers supporting Naidu.
During the session, the special public prosecutor for the CID brought a previous case involving a gag order from the high court and the Supreme Court’s intervention to the court’s attention. However, this move was met with immediate and aggressive responses from lawyers representing Naidu and local attorneys supporting him. They raised objections to the prosecutor’s involvement, questioned his origin in Telangana, and expressed their opposition to his presence in the proceedings.
The court, taken aback by these unfolding events, struggled to restore order within the legal community, and the session remained in disarray. Lawyers made attempts to intimidate the court and government lawyers. Chandrababu Naidu’s legal arguments appeared aimed at intimidating the court and casting doubt on its motives, a pattern that has been recurrent in both the special and high courts.
In a related development, the High Court had granted interim protection to Naidu until Monday in the alleged Inner Ring Road (IRR) scam case the day before, with a reminder to counsel to maintain decorum in the courtroom and avoid raising their voices. The court said that lawyers are officers of the court, and legal proceedings require swift and respectful conduct. In response, Naidu’s legal team conveyed that their aggressive responses were driven by concern and not intended as a sign of disrespect toward the court. It is noteworthy that these confrontations have been witnessed by a wide audience, including those attending hybrid virtual proceedings in the High Court.
