"Violates Fundamental Right": KTR Refuses To Give Phone To Telangana Officials
Hyderabad:
Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) leader KT Rama Rao has refused to submit his mobile phone or any other personal device to Telangana's Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) that is probing the Formula E race case.
Mr Rao, who is popularly known as KTR, was issued a deadline to submit his mobile phones, laptops and other electronic devices that he used between November 1, 2021, and December 1, 2023, by Wednesday.
He, however, wrote a 2-page letter to the investigating officer of the ACB, questioning the relevance and legality of the agency's asking for his personal devices.
He also said he had changed his mobile phone in the first quarter of 2024 and did not have his old phone. He said he had not used any other electronic devices during that period.
Mr Rao, the BRS working president, also cited his constitutional and legal rights that allow him to decline the demand made by investigators.
He said he had appeared before the ACB on June 16 and answered all their questions for seven hours.
The notice under Section 94 of the BNSS, KTR said, did not specify the reason or purpose for seeking these devices, nor did it say why they were necessary for the investigation.
The investigating agency already had access to all official documents related to the case, he said, pointing out that he had taken all decisions in his official capacity as minister.
KTR said asking for his personal devices violates his fundamental rights, personal privacy and protection against self-incrimination, guaranteed under the Constitution.
The MLA from Siricilla said that if any electronic devices were to be examined, strict protocols laid down by the Supreme Court must be followed to avoid any tampering or misuse of data.
A corruption case was lodged against Mr Rao, the former Telangana minister, last year in connection with alleged irregularities in the Formula E car race in Hyderabad. He has been accused of misusing government funds and his authority as the Municipal Administration and Urban Development minister.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
37 minutes ago
- Time of India
US Supreme Court upholds Tennessee law banning youth transgender care
Washington: The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Republican-backed ban in Tennessee on gender-affirming medical care for transgender minors on Wednesday in a setback for transgender rights that could bolster efforts by states to defend other measures targeting transgender people. The court, in a 6-3 ruling powered by its conservative justices, decided that the ban does not violate the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment promise of equal protection, as challengers to the law had argued. The ruling affirmed a lower court's decision that backed Tennessee's law, which bars medical treatments such as puberty blockers and hormones for people under age 18 experiencing gender dysphoria. The Supreme Court's three liberal justices dissented. "Tennessee concluded that there is an ongoing debate among medical experts regarding the risks and benefits associated with administering puberty blockers and hormones to treat gender dysphoria, gender identity disorder and gender incongruence. (The law's) ban on such treatments responds directly to that uncertainty," conservative Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court's majority. Gender dysphoria is the clinical diagnosis for significant distress that can result from an incongruence between a person's gender identity and the sex assigned at birth. Chase Strangio, a transgender American Civil Liberties lawyer who represented some of the challengers in the case, called the ruling "a devastating loss for transgender people, our families and everyone who cares about the Constitution." Transgender rights as an issue has become a major flashpoint in the U.S. culture wars. Since returning to office in January, Republican President Donald Trump has taken a hardline stance against transgender rights. Wednesday's ruling will have a broad impact as Tennessee's law is one of 25 such policies enacted by conservative state lawmakers around the United States. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi , a Trump appointee, in a social media post applauded the ruling and encouraged other states to "follow Tennessee's lead and enact similar legislation to protect our kids." Various other state restrictions have been enacted in recent years targeting transgender people, from bathroom use to sports participation, some limited to minors but others extending to adults. Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed dismay that the Supreme Court largely deferred to the state legislature's policy choices in upholding the ban. "By retreating from meaningful judicial review exactly where it matters most, the court abandons transgender children and their families to political whims. In sadness, I dissent," Sotomayor wrote, joined by fellow liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The Justice Department under Democratic former President Joe Biden's administration had challenged the law. Trump's administration told the Supreme Court in February that Tennessee's ban was not unlawful, reversing the government's position. Tennessee's law, passed in 2023, aims to encourage minors to "appreciate their sex" by prohibiting healthcare workers from prescribing puberty blockers and hormones to help them live as "a purported identity inconsistent with the minor's sex." Providers can be sued and face fines and professional discipline under the law for any violations. The law allows these medications to be used for any other purpose, including to address congenital defects, early-onset puberty or other conditions. Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti welcomed Wednesday's ruling, saying that the state legislature had "voted to protect kids from irreversible decisions they cannot yet fully understand." Several plaintiffs - three transgender minors and their parents, as well as a doctor who provides the type of care at issue - sued to challenge the Tennessee law's legality. Biden's Justice Department subsequently intervened in the lawsuit, opposing Tennessee's law. The challengers argued that the law discriminates against these adolescents based on sex and transgender status, violating the 14th Amendment. 'DIGNITY AND EQUALITY' Some transgender people gathered at a church near the Supreme Court building and denounced the ruling. "I am myself trans, and I am very concerned about efforts to erase transgender people from public life," Nicky Sundt said in an interview. The ACLU's Strangio said, "We are as determined as ever to fight for the dignity and equality of every transgender person." Tennessee has said it is banning "risky, unproven gender-transition interventions," pointing to "scientific uncertainty," tightened restrictions in some European countries and "firsthand accounts of regret and harm" from people who discontinue or reverse treatments. Medical associations, noting that gender dysphoria is associated with higher rates of suicide, have said gender-affirming care can be life-saving, and that long-term studies show its effectiveness. Lucas Cameron-Vaughn, a lawyer at the ACLU of Tennessee, said, "This ruling creates a class of people who politicians believe deserve healthcare, and a class of people who do not." A federal judge blocked the law as likely violating the 14th Amendment but the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals later reversed the judge's preliminary injunction. In a June 11-12 Reuters/Ipsos poll of Americans, 53% of respondents said they supported "laws that prevent transgender children under the age of 18 from getting medical treatment related to gender identity and gender transitioning." Another 28% opposed such laws and the rest were unsure or did not answer the question. Among Republicans, support for such laws was at 57% and opposition at 28%. Among Democrats, support was at 23% and opposition at 54%. The Supreme Court on May 6 permitted Trump's administration to implement his ban on transgender people in the military while legal challenges play out. Trump has taken actions targeting "gender ideology" and declaring that the U.S. government will recognize two sexes: male and female. Trump issued executive orders curtailing gender-affirming medical treatments for youth under 19 and excluding transgender girls and women from female sports, while rescinding Biden's orders combating discrimination against gay and transgender people. Will Dunham )
News18
an hour ago
- News18
‘Systemic Apathy': Chhattisgarh HC Orders Rs 2 Lakh Compensation For Custodial Death Of 27-Year-Old
Last Updated: The court held that the State is liable for violation of the fundamental right to life and emphasised that compensation must have a deterrent effect to prevent such violations. In a scathing indictment of custodial abuse and systemic apathy, the Chhattisgarh High Court has directed the State to pay Rs 2 lakh compensation to the mother of a 27-year-old man, Suraj Haththel, who died while in police custody. The Division Bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru held that the State is liable for violation of the fundamental right to life and emphasised that compensation must have a deterrent effect to prevent such violations. 'Compensation must serve as deterrence' 'The Courts have time and again deprecated such conduct on the part of police/jail officials…the compensation, which is to be awarded, should also have a deterrent effect on the State," the Bench observed, reiterating that custodial violence undermines the rule of law and fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by the deceased's mother, who had sought an independent investigation; preferably by the CBI, into her son's death, along with the post-mortem report, CCTV footage from the relevant police station, and other related documents. She also sought monetary compensation, arguing that the official narrative was riddled with contradictions. Suspicious death, missing CCTV footage, and contested injury claims The magisterial inquiry had attributed the cause of death to a 'myocardial infarction" owing to coronary artery disease. However, the post-mortem report revealed multiple injuries including abrasions and lacerations, raising serious questions about custodial torture. Further, the judicial inquiry noted that CCTV footage was only available until 2:47 AM, the exact time after which the deceased was reportedly taken out of the police station. The State attributed this gap to a 'power cut," a claim the petitioner disputed, pointing out that no evidence of such a power outage was produced, thereby suggesting a deliberate attempt to destroy or suppress evidence. Court slams State's version, cites Supreme Court precedents Rejecting the State's defence, the High Court observed that its version lacked credibility and appeared designed to obscure the truth. The Bench referred to landmark Supreme Court judgments in Saheli v. Commissioner of Police (1989), Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993), DK Basu v State of West Bengal (1996), and Ajab Singh v. State of UP (2000), all of which affirmed the liability of the State in custodial deaths. Quoting the Supreme Court's 2017 judgment In Re: Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, the Court reiterated, 'Human rights are not dependent on the status of a person but are universal in nature… A person in prison custody could nevertheless be a victim of an unnatural death. Hence the need to compensate the next of kin." Compensation for public law breach, not just private wrong The Court underlined that in cases of custodial death, compensation awarded under Article 226 is in the nature of exemplary damages and distinct from private law remedies such as tort claims or criminal prosecution. 'This is compensation awarded for breach of public law duty, not in substitution of other legal remedies," the Bench clarified. State directed to compensate within 8 weeks Accordingly, the Court held that the petitioner is entitled to compensation as her son died due to negligence and misconduct on the part of the State's officials. A writ of mandamus was issued directing the State to pay Rs 2,00,000 within eight weeks, failing which the amount will carry 9 per cent annual interest from the date of the order. 'Taking into consideration the loss of estate, love and affection, and dependency due to the untimely death of the petitioner's son, we find the State liable for monetary reparation," the Bench concluded. First Published: News india 'Systemic Apathy': Chhattisgarh HC Orders Rs 2 Lakh Compensation For Custodial Death Of 27-Year-Old
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Longer waits, manual overrides': Ex-top cop sparks debate on Bengaluru's new AI traffic signals
BJP leader and former Bengaluru Police Commissioner Bhaskar Rao on Wednesday condemned the use of artificial intelligence-powered traffic signals in the city, terming them 'counter productive'. He took to social media site X and posted that the new AI-powered traffic signals in Bengaluru are causing longer waits and making commutes worse. Manual overrides are also becoming a common occurrence, he said. Rao, who first joined the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and switched to the BJP later, added that the "smart" electric meters in auto rickshaws are no better. READ | Nithin and Nikhil Kamath's mother says she raised sons with 'nutritious food': 'Never ever ordered outside food' 'The New signals with AI in Bengaluru seems to be counter productive. Longer waiting time..!! Manual intervention is going on. Journey time is taking longer. Similar is the experience with Smart Electrical Meters, again manual intervention. Who in the Government is doing this,' he wrote. 'Exciting Intervention with IT…Brilliant IT Minister should also address constant 'Server Down' in Revenue and Sub Registrar offices.. @PriyankKharge can leave Trump and Modi to run the world, he could address t the Citizens Issues,' he added, tagging BESCOM, the power supply body of Bengaluru, as well as the city's Joint Commissioner of Police for traffic. READ | Bengaluru traffic '5X worse' after bike taxi ban? Residents complain of choking roads He also shared a video of an auto rickshaw driver who echoed the sentiments and said the old signals were better for daily commutes. The post quickly garnered attention online, and accumulated over 13,000 views at the time this article is being written. It also triggered a discussion on Bengaluru's never-ending traffic woes, with a social media user writing, 'Japanese have probably designed the algorithms considering lane discipline and roads of Japan . Tech is not translating to the chaos of our city.' READ | 'Two bombs…': Bengaluru's Kempegowda International Airport gets hoax bomb threat 'VAC signals are a farce, they have set a fixed timing for pedestrians and it defeats the very purpose of vehicle authentication, some signals turn red after 15 seconds even though a long pile up is there,' another posted. "The Japanese "Moderato" AI traffic signals were just a huge waste of money! Instead of that, govt must've just speeded up metro construction," a user said.
