T'gana HC sets aside BRS MLA Venkateswara Rao's election for filing false affidavit in polls


PTI | Hyderabad | Updated: 25-07-2023 19:53 IST | Created: 25-07-2023 19:39 IST
T'gana HC sets aside BRS MLA Venkateswara Rao's election for filing false affidavit in polls
Representative Image Image Credit: Wikimedia
  • Country:
  • India

The Telangana High Court on Tuesday set aside the election of ruling BRS MLA Vanama Venkateswara Rao from Kothagudem Assembly constituency in 2018 for suppressing information relating to his immovable assets while filing Form-26 affidavit during the polls.

The court also declared the petitioner Jalagam Venkat Rao, a TRS Party (now BRS) candidate and his nearest rival in 2018 Assembly, as elected.

Venkateswara Rao won from Kothagudem on a Congress ticket in 2018 Assembly polls and later switched over to the BRS (then TRS).

Besides, the court also imposed a fine of Rs five lakh on Vanama Venkateswara Rao. Justice G Radha Rani passed the order while allowing the election petition (EP) of Jalgam Venkat Rao, a former MLA and TRS party (now BRS) candidate for the segment challenging Venkateswara Rao's election.

''In the result, the Election Petition is allowed, declaring the election of respondent No.1 as returned candidate for 117 Kothagudem Assembly Constituency, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, Telangana State as void. The petitioner is declared as returned candidate for 117-Kothagudem Assembly Constituency with effect from 12.12.2018,'' the order said.

''The respondent No.1 is also sentenced with fine of Rs.5,00,000 (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) as a penalty for filing false affidavit. Respondent No.1 is also directed to pay costs to the petitioner,'' the order further said.

The petitioner alleged that Vanama Venkateswara Rao suppressed certain facts in his election affidavit with regard to immovable assets.

Despite repeated attempts, Vanama Venkateswara Rao could not be reached for his comments.

It is also to be noted that Venkateswara Rao being a party to the proceedings did not choose to enter the witness box and face the cross-examination. Thus an adverse inference could be drawn against him as per Section 114 of the Evidence Act, the court observed.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Give Feedback