Monday, December 4, 2023
Home » Nation » Current Affairs » July 19, 2023

Missing Person Traced; Set Him Free, Says Telangana High Court


Published on: July 19, 2023 | Updated on: July 19, 2023

Telangana High Court. (Image: DC)

Hyderabad: A two-judge panel, comprising Justice K. Lakshman and Justice Sree Sudha, made it clear that M. Tirupathi Reddy be set free and he should work out his remedies, as available under the law, if he apprehends danger to his life.  The panel was dealing with a habeas corpus writ petition filed by his wife Mukkera Sujatha apprehending that he was kidnapped by one M. Janardhan Reddy, an aide of BRS legislator Mynampally Hanumanth Rao. In her writ petition, she alleged that even though she went to Alwal police station and lodged a complaint, the police are unable to trace him. The counsel for the petitioner contended that Janardhan Reddy was threatening the detenue as he was opposing their illegal encroachment of his lands. He further argued that petitioner has also filed another writ petition to impose Preventive Detention Act as the respondent has 20 FIRs pending against him. The detenue was produced in the court. He informed the court that the respondent tried to kidnap him in the MRO office at Alwal . He escaped and went to Vijayawada to save his life. The court then directed his release and set him free.

HC directs SHRC to reconsider complaint against police              

A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday directed the state Human Rights Commission (SHRC) to consider a complaint of abuse of power during the Covid period. The bench of acting Chief Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao took on a writ plea filed by Dr Ananth Kabra, a septuagenarian resident of Kachiguda, who complained against abuse of power by the police. The incident happened during the pandemic when the petitioner was ill-treated and physically abused while on transit for duty. The petitioner’s counsel contended that a complaint was filed regarding the incident before the commission, which rejected it by stating that such a complaint shall be filed within a limitation period of one year of the incident. The counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the order passed in March 2022 by the commission was unsustainable as per the reported judgement of the apex court, which extended the limitation period by 90 days. The bench, in its verdict, remanded the complaint back to the commission to consider the petitioner's grievance and disposed of the writ petition.

File counter in RTE PIL: HC

A two-judge PIL bench of the Telangana High Court granted four weeks’ time to the state to come up with its report on ensuring proper facilities for school-going children under the Right to Education (RTE) Act. The panel was dealing with a writ plea filed by B. Abhiram relying substantially on reports published in Deccan Chronicle. Earlier the High Court had directed the government to update the court on the steps it was taking in accordance with the directions of the apex court. T. Swetcha, counsel for the petitioner, pointed out that the government had failed to submit its report as earlier directed. The court, while enlarging the time to the government to file its report, said that the government would file its counter to the allegations in the affidavit.

HC summons revenue report on journalists house sites  

A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court, comprising Justice T. Vinod Kumar and Justice Pulla Karthik, directed the revenue authorities to place before it a survey report relating to land set to be assigned to a journalist at Nizampet road, Medchal. The bench is dealing with an appeal filed by D.B. Narender Babu. Earlier the appellant questioned the action of revenue authorities in seeking to high-handedly dispose of the petitioner of land that he had purchased over two decades ago in a public auction conducted by the state finance corporation. In 2006, land of about 32 acres was assigned for journalists while it is the case of the revenue department that the petitioner was encroaching on the land earmarked for journalists the petitioner would contend otherwise. The petitioner complained that the single judge erred in issuing a direction against the petitioner in a writ petition filed by him. It was also pointed out that the alleged survey report was not supplied to the petitioner. The bench summoned a copy of the report.