Telangana HC Admits Reinvestigation Case In Unnatural Death Case
The writ petition was filed by Ajay Kumar Sharma, father of the deceased
Hyderabad: Justice N. Tukaramji of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ petition seeking a fresh probe into the controversial death of a young married woman in 2019, initially ruled as a suicide. The writ petition was filed by Ajay Kumar Sharma, father of the deceased, alleging that the respondent authorities failed to conduct a proper probe into the death of his daughter, which occurred within seven years of her marriage. The Petitioner sought direction against senior police officials to reopen the investigation and conduct a fresh probe by considering detailed representations and materials submitted in 2019. It is alleged that despite repeated complaints to higher authorities, the investigation was not carried out thoroughly.
The Government Pleader opposed the plea, contending that the investigation was already concluded and that the deceased died by suicide after hanging herself. It was further contended that the deceased was allegedly suffering from mental depression, and left behind a suicide note attributing the act to her personal failures. The Government Pleader further pointed out that the Forensic Science Laboratory report confirmed the cause of death as hanging, supporting the conclusion reached by the investigators. After hearing the submissions of both the counsels, the judge posted the matter for further hearing.
Telangana HC Reserves Order on Scholar’s Plea Against Osmania University Cancelling Ph.D. Registration
Justice Juvvadi Sridevi of the Telangana High Court reserved orders in a writ petition filed by a research scholar challenging the cancellation of his Ph.D registration by Osmania University. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Pramod Jayaprakash Swami, who sought to declare the of the University notice dated June 30, 2022, rejecting his request for extension of time to submit his Ph.D thesis and cancelling his registration as illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of constitutional principles. The petitioner stated that he was admitted as a full-time Ph.D scholar in Chemistry, at a time when the programme permitted extensions up to eight years.
However, the university subsequently amended its regulations in 2015, limiting the maximum duration to six years. He contended that he was granted extensions earlier and applied for a final extension in December 2021, citing disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and injuries from an accident. Relying on guidelines issued by the University Grants Commission, which granted additional time for submission of theses during the pandemic, he argued that the university acted arbitrarily in rejecting his request. He further submitted that he had completed nearly 90% of his research work and was left only with thesis submission. The university opposed the plea, stating that under its Ph.D regulations, the maximum permissible period for full-time scholars is six years, after which registration stands automatically cancelled. It argued that the petitioner failed to submit his thesis despite multiple opportunities, unlike other scholars who availed the extended timelines. After hearing both sides, the Court reserved the matter for judgment.
Telangana HC Issues Notices to Accused in Vikarabad Murder Acquittal Appeal
A two judge panel of the Telangana High Court issued notices to the multiple accused in a State appeal against acquittal in a murder case, signalling a fresh judicial probe into the controversial Sessions Court verdict. The panel comprising Justice K. Lakshman and Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao is dealing with a Criminal Appeal filed by the State challenging the judgment against the Sessions Judge, Vikarabad, wherein the accused were acquitted.
The Public Prosecutor sought setting aside of the acquittal order and conviction of the accused persons, who are residents of Thondupally village in Parigi Mandal of Vikarabad district. After hearing submissions of both the sides, the Judge admitted the appeal against acquittal of the accused, thereby opening the door for a re-examination of the trial court’s findings. The matter was posted for further hearing.