Stay on NBW, Sujana told to attend court

Sujana Chowdary will have to appear before the trial court on May 5, which will decide on his plea for exemption

The Hyderabad High Court on Tuesday, while staying the non-bailable warrant issued by a city court against Union minister Y.S. Chowdary, made it clear that the minister would have to appear before the trial court in view of the war- rant issued by it. When counsel for the minister submitted that he was unable to attend on April 26 as ordered by the trial court, Justice Raja Elango permitted the petitioner to appear before the trial court on May 5.

Justice Elango was granting an interim order on a petition by Mr Y.S. Chowdary seeking to quash the proceedings along with the non-bailable warrant issued by the XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, on a complaint filed by the Mauritius Commercial Bank.

The Hyderabad High Court on Tuesday, while staying the non-bailable warrant issued by a city court against Union minister Y.S. Chowdary, made it clear that the minister would have to appear before the trial court.

The XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has been hearing a complaint by the Mauritius Commercial Bank for recovery of a `106-crore loan availed by Hestia Holdings Ltd, which is a subsidiary of Sujana Universal Industries Ltd in which the minister in a nonexecutive director, and Sujana Industries had stood as guarantor to the loan.

Ashok Bhan, senior counsel from Supreme Court appearing for the minister, submitted that as his client was a minister, he was unable to attend before the trial court personally in view of his busy schedule.

He said the minister had filed an application before the trial court explaining his difficulty in appearing before it, but despite that the trial court had ordered the warrant. He urged the court to stay the warrant and also quash the case against his client.

At this stage, the judge asked the opinion of counsel for the Mauritius Bank who replied that they had no objection on the warrant being stayed, but the quash petition had to be decided after the hearing.

While staying the warrant, the judge made it clear that in view of the issuance of the warrant by the trial court, the petitioner had to appear before the trial court on May 5. His personal appearance would be exempted by the trial court after he appeared before it and furnishing sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.