Contempt Notice Issued to Police Chief Over Cinema Ticket Hike

Hyderabad: Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday issued a fresh contempt notice to the city police commissioner, the cinema licensing authority, for issuing ticket price hike memos, and directed impleading of the Telangana Film Development Corporation. Allowing an interlocutory application, the judge directed the state to issue ticket price hike memos in a manner that enabled the 90-day period under Section 7-A to be effectively exercised by any person aggrieved. The writ petition was filed by Dachepally Chandra Babu questioning the issuance of a memo by the home department permitting a hike in ticket prices for ‘Mana Shankara Vara Prasad Garu’, a Telugu film produced by Shine Screens India LLP. The petitioner referring to Section 7-A of the Telangana Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1955 and contended that while the statute provided a 90-day window to seek review of such decisions, the state was issuing price hike memos either on the day of release or a day prior, making any challenge illusory and infructuous. It was argued that the statutory right of review existed only on paper when the decision took effect immediately, leaving no realistic opportunity for an aggrieved person to invoke the remedy. The judge observed that because of such timing, an effective remedy is not made available to citizens. The judge noted that the memo in the present case was dated January 8 and was made available only on January 10, even as the price hike took effect contemporaneously with the film’s release. The judge posted the matter for further hearing.

2. Anchor moves HC on action against TV debate

Justice K. Tirumala Devi of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday took on file a criminal petition filed by television anchor Mutiyal Naidu Babu, assailing the criminal proceedings initiated against him in connection with allegations of defamation and dissemination of unlawful media content. The petition arose from a criminal complaint lodged against more than 100 individuals, encompassing media professionals, television anchors, and digital content creators, purportedly in relation to a widely telecast media debate concerning divergent viewpoints expressed by actors and actresses. It was contended that the petitioner had been indiscriminately and mechanically roped in as an accused, without specific, proximate, or attributable allegations constituting the offence of defamation. It was argued that the chargesheet failed to disclose any material particulars or overt acts attributable to the petitioner, and that invocation of multiple penal provisions, in the absence of foundational facts, was legally untenable. It was argued that the continuation of the proceedings would amount to a gross abuse of the process of law and warrants interference. The public prosecutor sought time to obtain instructions in the matter. The judge posted the matter further hearing.

3.HC spikes plea by Pak national

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court junked a plea of a Pakistani national residing in Hyderabad who alleged harassment by police for compelling him to apply for a long-term visa (LTV). The judge refused to restrain immigration and police authorities from discharging their statutory duties of verification process under the Foreigners Act and visa regulations. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Syed Ali Hussain Razvi, who claimed Indian citizenship by birth and alleged that the Inspector of police, Pakistan branch, repeatedly visited his residence, pressuring him to apply for an LTV and threatening prosecution without issuing notice. He contended that such actions violated the Constitution and interfered with his settled family life in Hyderabad. The state disputed the claim, relying on official records indicating that the petitioner was recorded as a Pakistani national whose name appeared in his mother’s Pakistani passport, with discrepancies in identity particulars and year of birth. The judge noted that documents such as Aadhaar, voter ID and educational certificates could not, by themselves, establish citizenship under the Citizenship Act, 1955, particularly when statutory verification under the Foreigners Act, 1946 and visa regulations was underway. Holding that the authorities’ actions formed part of a lawful verification process pursuant to a Union ministry of home affairs order, the judge refused to restrain the officials from discharging their statutory duties. Since both the petitioner and his mother had applied afresh for LTVs, the judge directed the respondents to consider the applications and pass appropriate orders at the earliest.