Non-Cognisable Offence Probe Without Order Invalid: High Court

Justice J. Anil Kumar of the Telangana High Court ruled that an investigation by a police officer in a non-cognisable offence is not permitted without a magistrate's order to try such a case or commit the case for trial. The judge was dealing with a criminal petition filed by Gunturu Vivek Reddy Vikas Reddy, a student booked in connection with a brawl outside a tea kiosk near a college in Dundigal. The petitioner submitted that police flouted mandatory legal procedures by investigating a non-cognisable offence without obtaining prior sanction from a magistrate, as required under Section 174(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The case of the prosecution was that on March 12, a quarrel involving students and outsiders was reported by a police constable. Consequently, eight accused were arrayed under Section 194(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which defines the offence of affray and prescribes punishment of up to one month imprisonment or a fine of `1,000. Counsel for the petitioner argued that, while the police acted citing urgency to prevent breach of peace, their failure to follow statutory safeguards rendered the investigation invalid. The judge, relying on the rulings of the apex court, observed that no investigation into non-cognisable offences is permissible without an order from a magistrate, and continuing the case would amount to “abuse of process of law.” The judge accordingly quashed the proceedings against the petitioner.

Hospital challenges blocklisting by health dept

Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ plea challenging the proceedings of the director of public health by which a hospital was placed on the blocklist. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Vinayaka Super Specialty Hospital, which contended that prior to the impugned order, the hospital regularly facilitated treatment of patients under the Chief Minister Relief Fund, enabling them to seek reimbursement as per eligibility. The hospital contended that blocklisting effectively denied patients access to such benefits. The hospital was seeking quash of the impugned proceedings, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and beyond the powers of the authorities. The respondents sought time for instructions in the matter.

 Bail in case of alleged sexual exploitation

Justice K. Sujana of the Telangana High Court granted bail to an accused facing charges of cheating and sexually exploiting a woman on the false promise of marriage. The judge was hearing a criminal petition filed by Kolachina Rama Teja Sharma, who sought enlargement on bail. According to the prosecution, the de facto complainant alleged that the accused assured her he would arrange hostel accommodation and support her education. It was claimed that while she was staying at his residence in May 2025, he induced her into physical relations on the promise of marriage, but later revealed that he was already married. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the complainant was aware of his marital status and that he had been falsely implicated. It was submitted that the petitioner had been in custody since July, and that the crucial part of the investigation, including examination of witnesses, was complete. As the material investigation was complete, the judge deemed it fit to grant conditional bail to the petitioner.