How the cash-for-vote case leaves Telangana govt with egg on its face

Hyderabad: Has the cash-for-vote case fallen flat on the face of the Telangana government? The Supreme Court’s rejection of the appeal of the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) of Telangana seeking the cancellation of bail granted by the High Court of Hyderabad to TDP MLA A Revanth Reddy has delivered a body blow to the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) and also to its government.[caption id=“attachment_2284696” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Andhra Pradesh CM Chandrababu Naidu and Telangana CM K Chandrasekhar Rao.[/caption] The denouement of the cash-for-vote soap opera, which entertained the people of both states of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, cannot be trivialised. But, surely the state’s demeanour is giving rise to innumerable doubts whether its moves in this case have been legally diligent and politically dexterous. The TRS supremo Kalvakuntla Chandrashekar Rao, who appeared to have won the battle in its round one, doesn’t seem to stand ground any longer, what with the Telangana state’s arguments which are as strong as the weakest link in the script of the “assault serial”. The war of words between Chandrasekhar Rao and Chandrababu Naidu over the issue has surely taken the already strained relation between the two leaders to a breaking point. Now the bitterness between the duo stretched to such an extent that they do not see even eye to eye. KCR skipped the dinner hosted by Governor ESL Narasimhan in the honour of President Pranab Mukherjee, while Chandrababu Naidu would stay away from a similar party scheduled soon, as he will be on a foreign tour. Initially, the TDP camp was certainly worried over its own credibility ebbing consequent upon the “leak’ of a video footage in which Revanth Reddy was seen doling out wads of currency and also a plethora of promises on behalf of his “boss”. This triggered the arrest of Reddy. Though TDP launched a broadside against KCR and the TRS for “falsely implicating” the legislator in the case, its argument remained feeble. Once the audio tapes consisting of a conversation purportedly between none other than Chandrababu Naidu himself and Anglo-Indian MLA in the Telangana Assembly Elvis Stephenson were “leaked”, the TDP appeared as if it was fighting a losing battle. The notice issued to Satthupalli TDP MLA S Venkata Veeraiah, who “fled” to AP, and the questioning of another TDP leader Vem Narender Reddy really pushed the TDP to a corner, if not asphyxiated its rank and file. Then came the forensic examination of the tapes and video footage, solemn statements under Section 164 by the complainant Stephenson and the three accused persons, including MLA Revanth Reddy. The dismissal of the bail plea of the accused by the ACB court has fomented the acrimony between the two political parties. Ministers on both sides went to the extent of hurling invectives targeting Naidu and KCR, washing the proverbial dirty linen, not only in the TV talk shows, but even in public meetings and at the slightest of opportunities. The biggest blunder on the part of the TRS in the scheme of things, if they can be called so, is the petition filed by Stephenson seeking the recusal of a judge hearing the appeal of one of the accused, Jerusalem Mathaiah, who is “at large” according to Telangana police. Interestingly, the high court directed the police not to arrest Mathaiah for four weeks. Disposing of the petition seeking his recusal, justice Shiva Sankar Rao reprimanded the petitioner for his prayer and directed the police to file a case of contempt of court and initiate proceedings against Stephenson with the permission of the Chief Justice of the High Court of Hyderabad. The judgement came this way, in spite of the Telangana Advocate-General Ramakrishna Reddy “advising” the judge to “oblige” the appeal of Stephenson, though it was not mandatory. The grant of bail to Revanth Reddy after one month of imprisonment, though not unexpected, has come as a rude shock to the TRS regime. The subsequent “victory rally” of Revanth Reddy and his inflammatory speech against the chief minister were treated as “cognizable offences” by the Telangana Police and seven cases of violation of law and several other criminal charges were slapped on the TDP MLA. Is this a strategic move or wreaking vengeance owing to anger triggered by “disappointment” will be known in the days to come. But, clearly, KCR appeared to have lost the game to Chandrababu Naidu when the matter reached the precincts of judiciary. The egging of Telangana Advocates Association on to the Centre with a demand to carve out a separate high court for the State of Telangana at this point in time is seen as a “calculated risk” taken by the TRS leadership, albeit, from behind the scenes, that boomeranged. The acerbic observations made by a senior office-bearer of the association about Chandrababu Naidu being a “great influencer” may have had its backlash too on the outcome of the bitterest battle between the TDP and the TRS so far. The redoubtable Chandrababu Naidu’s scheme of depicting the #CashforVote case as problem simmering between the two States of AP and Telangana was a superhit, even though the KCR Administration tried to annul the same by trying to impale only the criminality involved in the infamous cash-for-vote case. Now will the Telangana government be able to serve notices on Chandrababu Naidu to seek his voice sample and can the TRS think of touching him even with a bargepole? It is anybody’s guess.