Date: January 08, 2025
KTR Faces Another ACB Notice: What’s Happening?
The Telangana IT minister and prominent political figure, K.T. Rama Rao (KTR), is currently under scrutiny by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED). The investigation revolves around allegations of his involvement in the Formula E scam, where he is accused of verbally approving a ₹55 crore transaction, reportedly violating established regulations.
KTR: Tense Developments at the ACB Office
KTR, accompanied by his legal team, arrived at the ACB office in Hyderabad to address the allegations. However, he faced a setback as authorities denied his lawyers entry, stating their presence not permitted during the investigation.
Adding to the tension, the ACB issued a second notice just hours after the initial incident, summoning KTR to appear for questioning on January 9. The new notice explicitly instructed him to comply with the investigation without his legal team.
Search Operations and Media Speculation
Earlier in the day, media outlets speculated about possible search operations at KTR’s residence, though no official confirmation has been provided by the authorities. Shortly after these unverified reports, news about the second ACB notice surfaced, drawing significant media attention.
KTR Reluctance and Agency’s Stance
KTR has expressed his hesitation to participate in the investigation without his legal team present, citing the need for legal counsel during such proceedings. On the other hand, the investigation agencies remain steadfast in their decision to proceed without allowing lawyers into the inquiry.
This standoff raises questions about the trajectory of this high-profile case and whether KTR will comply with the agency’s demands. However, the investigation agencies remain firm on their stance, insisting that the inquiry must conducted without the involvement of legal representatives. Their approach has drawn both support and criticism from various quarters, with some viewing it as a measure to ensure an unbiased investigation, while others see it as an infringement on due process.