Retired IPS officer A.B. Venkateswara Rao has issued legal notices seeking damages of ₹1 crore to several retired and serving IPS officers, along with the Andhra Pradesh government, alleging malicious prosecution and unlawful suspension.
The notices were served under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Also read: Chhattisgarh CM Sai Emphasizes Panchayat Empowerment and Rural Development at State Conference in Raipur
Senior Officers Named in the Notices
Those named in the legal notices include former Directors General of Police D. Gautam Sawang and R.P. Thakur.
Other officers named are Ravi Shankar Ayyanar, Director General of CID; P.V. Sunil Kumar; P.S.R. Anjaneyulu; K. Raghurami Reddy; retired Additional SP (CID) R. Vijay Paul; retired Chief Accounts Officer in the DGP office, C. Govinda Rajan; ACB Additional SP S. Sai Krishna; and former CPRO to the Chief Minister, Pudi Srihari.
The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Chief Secretary, has also been made a respondent.
Allegations of Malicious Prosecution
Venkateswara Rao alleged that he was falsely implicated and victimised in a case related to the procurement of security and surveillance equipment.
The case involved the procurement of an aerostat and unmanned aerial vehicles through the State Trading Corporation of India for deployment in extremist-affected areas and for allied security operations.
He claimed that the alleged conspiracy against him began in 2018 when he was serving as Additional DGP (Intelligence).
Surveillance Procurement Case
As Additional DGP (Intelligence), Venkateswara Rao was responsible for adopting advanced surveillance technologies for monitoring extremist activities, national security, counter-terrorism, crime prevention, and maintenance of public order.
He has alleged that official records were fabricated and that he was unlawfully suspended and defamed.
High Court Order Cited
Venkateswara Rao said that the High Court quashed the FIR registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) and the charge sheet in its entirety.
According to him, the High Court’s decision established the malicious, unfounded, and vindictive nature of the prosecution launched against him.
Demand for Compensation With Interest
He has demanded damages of ₹1 crore along with 12% annual interest from February 8, 2020 — the date of the first cause of action.
The legal notices also cite violation of his fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees protection of life and personal liberty.
The development adds a fresh legal twist to the long-running controversy surrounding the surveillance equipment procurement case in Andhra Pradesh.
Also read: Delhi Heat Wave Action Plan 2026: CM Rekha Gupta Strengthens Health, School and Public Safety Preparedness
