2.
Trafficking case accused gets bail
The Telangana High Court granted bail to an accused in a human trafficking case. The allegations included repeated sexual assault, and offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The judge was hearing a criminal petition filed by Basher Ramesh Goud, was arrayed as accused for inter alia offences relating to trafficking, sexual exploitation and immoral trafficking. According to the prosecution, the victim, who lost her parents at a young age and was living at Mancherial railway Station, was allegedly lured under the pretext of assistance and later trafficked by a group of accused. It was alleged that she was sold in Madhya Pradesh for `1.1 lakh and subjected to repeated sexual assault, before she escaped and approached ICDS teachers, who facilitated registration of the complaint. Counsel for the petitioner would contend that no specific overt acts were attributed to the petitioner either in the complaint or the remand report, that the allegations did not disclose the ingredients of the offences alleged against him, and that he was in judicial custody since June 2025. It was also pointed out that the chargesheet was filed. Taking these factors into account, the judge held that continued incarceration was not warranted.
3.
HC quashes land resumption order
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court declared that revenue authorities while exercising power under The Telangana Assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977 (Talpot Act) must exercise discretionary powers within a “reasonable period” to maintain legal certainty and uphold the rule of law, even when the law did not prescribe a specific limitation period. The court had earlier allowed a writ petition and set aside the order of the revenue authorities. The panel was dealing with a writ appeal filed by the revenue authorities. Earlier, M. Ananthamma, a 53-year-old agriculturist, filed a writ petition successfully challenging the cancellation of the assignment in her favour. The Ibrahimpatnam tahsildar had assigned the land of about three acres at Kongara Kalan village in favour of Ananthamma. She and her mother enjoyed continuous possession, put the land under cultivation, and were engaged in agricultural activities and their name was mutated in the revenue records. She was also issued a pattadar passbook and title deeds for the land. In 1998, the district revenue officer, sought to cancel the assignment on the grounds that the respondent was a minor at the time of assignment, and further on the allegation that the assignment was obtained unlawfully due to the involvement of a patwari named Ratna Rao, who was suspended from service for misconduct in 1978. The assignee contended that the assignment was made on the basis of the recommendation from the assignment committee following an inquiry and the patwari was merely tasked with implementing the order. The respondent stressed that she had no other land and had made significant investments in cultivating and improving the assigned land. The district revenue officer rejected her defence and cancelled the patta. A single judge of the High Court held that the cancellation was unsustainable, especially in view of the absence of any finding or fraud or misrepresentation attributable to the respondent herself and the clear delay of 37 years which had created vested rights in her and quashed the order of the revenue authorities. Aggrieved by the same, the government was in appeal. Speaking for the panel, Justice V. Ramakrishna Reddy, observed that the cancellation proceedings were initiated after three-and-a-half decades. The judge found the exercise of such power was undesirable and that the order of the single judge was legal, valid and did not warrant interference.