SIT terms it publicity stunt, defends probe

CHARMEE’S PLEA IN HIGH COURT OVER DRUG PROBE

​Hyderabad: The Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing into the drug trafficking scandal described the attempt by actress Charmee Kaur in filing a petition in the High Court as nothing but a ‘publicity stunt’ but also intended to dilute and discredit the ongoing investigations to rid the society from drug menace.

The Tollywood heroine, who is one among the 12 personalities from tinsel town to be issued notices by the SIT in connection with the drug abuse case, had filed a petition in the High Court on Monday questioning the method being adopted by the investigating authorities like collecting blood, hair and nail samples.

The actress also wanted that the person being interrogated should be allowed to have his advocate during questioning and wanted the presence of a woman officer. The petition was filed on her behalf by advocate Vishnuvardhan Reddy.

When the petition came up for hearing in the High Court on Tuesday morning, the counsel for the actress pointed out that Charmee was neither an accused nor a witness in the drug issue. Explaining the manner in which the SIT officials had collected blood, hair and nail samples earlier from director Puri Jagannath, the counsel asserted that under Article 20, the rights of an individual had to be protected and samplers could not be obtained under duress.

The counsel for the actress further informed the court that the SIT office was like a police station and reputed and respected individuals in the society like Charmee were asked to appear for interrogation like accused persons. However, the actress was prepared to submit herself before the interrogating officials and cooperate with the authorities, he assured.

Refuting the allegations being made against the SIT, the counsel for the investigating authority reminded that notices were issued to Charmee and other film artistes on the basis of information provided by Calvin Mascarenhas, the mastermind behind the drug racket.

As a matter of fact, when the notice was issued to the actress, it was made clear that she could take the interrogation at her residence or at any place of her choice. However, the actress volunteered to come to the SIT office, the SIT counsel explained.

The SIT, through its counsel, further informed the court that Hyderabad was turning into another Mumbai in the matter of drug abuse. Chocolates and cool drinks laced with drugs and other narcotic substances were being made available in pubs and to students in schools and colleges, the court was informed, and made it clear that the objective of the interrogation was to identify the drug peddlers and the source of supply of the contraband substance.

With regards to the charge that blood samples were being collected forcibly, the SIT asserted that the samples were being obtained only after written consent from the person. Even film director Puri Jagannath had cooperated and gave his consent for collecting the samples, while actor Navdeep had refused to give his consent and hence no samples were collected from him, the court was informed.

Reiterating that the SIT and other investigating agencies had a lot of regard and respect for the Telugu film industry, the counsel for SIT observed that the industry’s fair name and image was being damaged because of a few persons.

All those being interrogated were treated with respect and all principles of law were followed during questioning. If the artistes had any respect for society and abide by the rule of law, why should they get panicked, the SIT asked and asserted the petition in question was filed in the court for publicity and dilute the investigation.