Telangana High Court Hears Harish Rao’s Plea in Phone-Tapping Case
The Telangana High Court, under Justice Kunuru Lakshman, reviewed two criminal petitions on Tuesday. These petitions were filed by Siddipet MLA T Harish Rao and former DCP Radhakishan Rao regarding a phone-tapping case. The case was registered by Panjagutta police after a complaint from G Chakradhar Goud.
Senior counsel Dama Seshadri Naidu, representing Harish Rao, argued that the complainant, Goud, has a criminal history. He pointed out that Goud has been facing 11 criminal cases since 2006, including serious charges like fraud and rape. Naidu accused the State government of protecting Goud despite his background.
The government, in response, defended the complainant and justified the delay in filing the FIR. It stated that the delay was explained in the counter-affidavit. The government also rejected claims that the case was baseless.
Naidu further argued that the FIR contained no proper evidence against his client. He said there was no proof of extortion, intimidation, or financial inducement. He also called the complaint vague and an act of revenge against Harish Rao. The main claim in the complaint was that Goud received a message from Apple stating his phone was tapped. Naidu dismissed this, saying many people had received similar messages.
During the hearing, Justice Lakshman interrupted and mentioned that he, too, had received such a message from Apple, suggesting it might not be relevant to the case.
Naidu also raised questions about Goud’s financial activities. He pointed out that Goud claimed to have given away ₹2.5 crore to farmers as charity, but his election affidavit showed assets worth only a few lakhs. Naidu suggested that Goud might have obtained the money through illegal means.
On the other hand, senior counsel Siddharth Luthra, representing the government, argued that the complainant’s phone, along with his family’s, had been tapped. He claimed this was done by the Special Intelligence Bureau (SIB) police on Harish Rao’s instructions, with the help of Radhakishan Rao, who was then a senior officer.
Due to a lack of time, the judge postponed the hearing to February 19. Meanwhile, the court extended interim protection from arrest for Harish Rao and Radhakishan Rao until the next hearing. The petitions seek to quash the FIR, which includes charges under various IPC sections and the IT Act.
