AP High Court orders security restoration for YS Viveka murder case witness 

The Capital News 
The High Court (AP High Court) has ordered the immediate restoration of the security cover for Komma Sivachandra Reddy, the main witness in the former YS Vivekananda Reddy murder case. Sivachandra Reddy filed a petition in the High Court against the withdrawal of the security gunmen previously granted by the Kadapa District Judge. During the court hearing, it was revealed that the petitioner had received a gunman under the Witness Protection Scheme 2018, stating that his family had been threatened by YS Jaganmohan Reddy and YS Avinash Reddy in the past. The petitioner claimed that the security was removed by the Kadapa SP four days ago without any prior notice.

Advocate Jada Shravan Kumar represented the petitioner in court, arguing that immediate security should be restored as the petitioner’s family was in danger. The bench considered the petitioner’s arguments and made it clear that withdrawal of security without the permission of the Kadapa District Judge is illegal. The Kadapa District SP has been directed to restore gunmen protection to the petitioner immediately.

The High Court has issued orders not to withdraw gunmen protection without the permission of the Kadapa District Judge. In a separate development, the Nampally CBI special court announced that Sheikh Dastgiri, the fourth accused (A-4) in the Viveka murder case, has been identified as a witness. Principal Special Judge Raghuram of the CBI Court allowed Dastagiri’s petition to be identified as a witness, not as an accused.

It has been clarified that Dastagiri will be identified as a witness until the charges are registered, as previously he was recognized as the approver by the Kadapa court before the case was transferred to Hyderabad. This recent identification of Dastagiri as a witness by the CBI court has dealt a blow to Avinash Reddy and other accused. Dastagiri’s evidence has become a key factor in the case and has weakened the defense’s argument that there was no evidence other than Dastagiri’s testimony