Medical Student Complaints Improper Evaluation of Medical Paper

Hyderabad: Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ petition challenging the action of Kaloji Narayana Rao University of Health Sciences in insisting a postgraduate medical student reappear for all theory papers despite failing by just one mark in a single subject. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Salman Mahmood, an MD (Anesthesiology) student, challenging the decision of university in requiring him to rewrite all four theory papers of the postgraduate examination. According to the petitioner, he appeared for the PG medical examinations conducted by the university in October 2025, which consisted of four theory papers apart from practical and viva-voce examinations. When the results were announced in November 2025, it was found that he had failed by one mark in Paper-I (Basic Sciences and Applied Anatomy), securing 39 marks against the pass mark of 40, while he cleared the remaining three papers. Aggrieved by the result, the student earlier approached the High Court seeking permission to inspect his answer script. The court directed that the petitioner be allowed to verify his answer sheet by approaching the grievance committee of the university and paying the prescribed fee. Pursuant to the order, the petitioner inspected his answer script and claimed that Question No. 6 had not been evaluated at all, as there were no markings by the examiner, resulting in zero marks for that answer. The petitioner contended that the insistence of university that he must rewrite all four theory papers is contrary to the Post-Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2023 issued by the National Medical Commission. Under the regulations, a candidate who fails under one head is required to reappear only for the theory and practical examinations under that head and not necessarily for all papers. He contended that since he passed three theory papers compelling him to retake them is arbitrary and illegal. He submitted that he has no objection to reappearing for the theory, practical and viva-voce examination only in respect of Paper-I. After hearing the parties, Justice Bheemapaka directed the respondents to obtain instructions in the matter and posted the case for further hearing.

Accused in false marriage case gets bail

The Telangana High Court granted bail to a 21-year-old engineering student accused of exploiting a woman on the promise of marriage and threatening to circulate her private photos and videos on social media. The judge was dealing with a criminal petition filed by the accused, in a FIR registered at the Rajendranagar Police Station. According to the prosecution, the complainant stated that she became acquainted with the accused about five months earlier through Instagram and developed a close relationship with him. She alleged that the accused promised to marry her and, under that assurance, had a physical relationship with her. The complainant stated that the accused tied a turmeric mangalsutra claiming that he had married her, but later denied the same and threatened to upload her personal photos and videos on social media. Based on her complaint, the police registered a case and arrested the accused. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the relationship was consensual and that the accused is a BTech student aged about 21 years, while the complainant was 25. It was argued that even according to the complainant there was no denial of marriage, as the accused had tied a mangalsutra, and therefore provisions of the BNS would not be attracted. The defence argued that the accused was in judicial custody since February 10 and sought bail considering his semester examinations. The additional public prosecutor opposed the bail plea stating that the allegations were serious in nature. However, after considering the submissions and perusing the material on record, the judge noted that several prosecution witnesses had been examined during investigation. Taking into account the stage of investigation, the nature of allegations and the duration of incarceration, the judge found it appropriate to grant bail.

Sada deeds do not confer title : HC

Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti of the Telangana High Court reiterated that simple or “sada” sale deeds could not confer title over immovable property. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Vemula Raji Reddy, challenging proceedings issued in April 2016 by the joint collector, Warangal, directing deletion of his name from the possessor column in revenue records relating to about 2.3 acres of land in Inapalli, Khanapur mandal, and restoration of the earlier entries. The petitioner contended that he derived rights over the land through a chain of private transactions and on the strength of these documents his name was entered in the possessor column of revenue records in 2005–06. On the other hand, the respondents argueed that the documents relied upon by the petitioner were unregistered sale papers and therefore incapable of conveying title. They also pointed out that a civil suit seeking declaration of ownership and recovery of possession over the same property was pending between the parties. The judge noted that the petitioner failed to produce any valid registered document establishing title. The judge ruled that simple sale deeds or sada sale deeds, unless validated in accordance with law, cannot be treated as evidence of conveyance of title, and therefore the joint collector was justified in directing deletion of the name of petitioner from the revenue records. The judge dismissed the writ petition clarifying that the parties are free to pursue their remedies in the pending civil proceedings concerning the property.