Hyderabad: Telangana high court has sentenced a former assistant commissioner of police to one month of simple imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 2,000 for violating its orders and arresting an accused despite interim protection from arrest granted by the court.Justice K Sujana found A Krishnaiah, former ACP, LB Nagar, Malkajgiri police commissionerate, guilty of wilfully disobeying the high court’s directions by arresting businessman Katta Vamsi Krishna in a dowry death case.However, on a request made by public prosecutor Palle Nageshwar Rao, the judge suspended the operation of the sentence for four weeks, until Oct 19, to enable the officer to file an appeal. Contempt proceedings against sub-inspector V Maraiah were dropped after the court found that he had no role in the arrest.The contempt case arose from a criminal case registered at Saroornagar police station in April following the death of Vamsi Krishna’s wife, allegedly due to harassment for additional dowry. The case was registered against Vamsi Krishna and his parents.The high court granted interim protection to Vamsi Krishna, directing the police not to arrest him.Despite the subsisting court orders, Vamsi Krishna was arrested while undergoing treatment at a hospital and was produced before the jurisdictional magistrate.In the contempt proceedings, the petitioner alleged that the police continuously harassed his family, pressured doctors to discharge him from hospital, ignored warnings from his lawyer about the court’s protection order, falsely showed him as “absconding” in case records, and proceeded with his arrest.He further submitted that although he was produced before a magistrate, the remand was rejected after the magistrate took note of the high court’s interim protection.Defending the officer, the public prosecutor argued that Krishnaiah was unaware that the interim order had been extended, acted in view of the seriousness of the offence, and had tendered an unconditional apology before the court.Justice Sujana, however, rejected the explanation and apology. The court held that once the officer was aware of the initial protection order, he was duty-bound to verify whether it had been extended by checking the high court’s website or through appropriate legal channels before proceeding with the arrest.The court observed that the officer’s own admission that he acted under pressure arising from the nature of the case, without verifying the status of the court’s orders, amounted to clear disobedience of judicial directions.
