YSR Congress Party president and former Andhra Pradesh chief minister Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy recently invited the family of his car accident victim Cheeli Singayya to his residence to offer condolences and assure them of support.
The meeting received widespread media attention, as it appears a humanitarian gesture towards a family in distress.
At the same time, it also triggered a debate in a section of media, on whether it is justified given the legal and ethical context involved.
Jagan is listed as the second accused (A2) in the case related to Singayya’s death, which occurred after the latter was run over by a vehicle allegedly linked to Jagan’s convoy.
Police have charged him under provisions relating to "culpable homicide not amounting to murder" for allegedly neglecting the incident despite being aware of it as the vehicle owner.
Jagan has filed a petition in the high court seeking to quash the charges.
The court has postponed the hearing and issued an interim order directing police to refrain from taking hasty action against him — effectively shielding him from arrest for the time being.
However, the order did not clearly specify whether or not police could question Jagan during this period.
Legal observers argue that while police have been restrained, the high court has not yet exonerated Jagan from the case.
As such, he, too must be bound by similar restrictions in terms of not influencing witnesses or victims — a principle commonly referred to as "natural justice."
So, during such sensitive phases of a case, accused persons are typically barred from contacting or influencing victims or witnesses, as it may impact the course of justice.
In this context, Jagan’s meeting with the family of the deceased at his residence—especially while the case is pending — has raised eyebrows.
“Such actions may potentially amount to an indirect attempt to influence the victims, whether intentionally or unintentionally,” an analyst said.
Legal experts stress that when an accused person has interim protection from arrest or is seeking bail/quashing of charges, they must not exploit this period to approach victims or tamper with evidence.
“Judicial decisions must not merely rely on technicalities but also uphold the larger spirit of justice and fairness,” the analyst added.
