Caste Abuse Case Accused Get bail

The judge was dealing with Criminal Petition filed by Vundyala Srinivas Reddy alias Srinivas Reddy and two others, who were arrayed as accused in FIR registered in Nagarkurnool Police Station under provisions of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015. According to the prosecution, the complainant alleged that during Kummera Jathara on 18th February, the first accused demanded money for temple darshan and, when she refused, abused her in the name of caste and pushed her to the ground.

It was further alleged that the accused dragged her husband into a room near the temple and beat him with a rod and coconut causing injuries, and during the altercation a two-month-old baby was allegedly kicked, resulting in injuries that led to the child’s death while undergoing treatment. Counsel for the petitioners argued that the incident did not occur as alleged, that the infant was not present at the scene, and that the petitioners were falsely implicated. It was also submitted that the petitioners have been in judicial custody since February and several witness statements have already been recorded during investigation.

The Public Prosecutor opposed the bail plea stating that the allegations are serious in nature and the investigation is still in progress. After considering the material on record, the judge observed that the petitioners have been in custody for several weeks, key witnesses was already been examined and certain statements placed before the Court create doubt regarding the presence of the complainant at the scene. Taking into account the stage of investigation, the nature of injuries and the period of incarceration, the judge deemed appropriate to grant bail.

Justice J. Sreenivasa Rao of the Telangana High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings in a stamp duty fraud case, holding that serious allegations of document manipulation and financial irregularities must be thoroughly investigated before any judicial interference.

The judge was dealing with a criminal petition filed by Dasari Srikanth, seeking quashing of proceedings for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Information Technology Act.

The case arises from a complaint by the Tahsildar alleging large-scale irregularities in property registrations, resulting in a deficit stamp duty exceeding ₹71 lakh. According to the prosecution, the petitioner was involved in submitting documents for registration by paying only a fraction of the required charges and allegedly uploading manipulated challans to falsely reflect full payment.

The defence, however, contended that the petitioner was a daily wage worker with no direct role in the alleged fraud and had been falsely implicated merely for assisting a document writer. Rejecting the plea, the Judge observed that there are specific and direct allegations against the petitioner, including use of his own user ID in processing the disputed transactions. It was held that whether such allegations are true can only be determined during the course of investigation and not in proceedings seeking quashment at the threshold.

Relying on precedents laid down by the Supreme Court the judge emphasized that quashing of criminal proceedings at an initial stage is an exception and not the rule. Declaring that the investigation is still in progress and cannot be stifled prematurely, the judge dismissed the petition, allowing the probe into the alleged fraud network to continue.

Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ plea challenging revenue proceedings concerning lands treated as waqf property and included in the prohibitory list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act situated at Maheshwaram Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by M/s Vision Ventures, which sought to declare the impugned proceedings issued dated October 25, 2025, passed in a suo-motu appeal nearly 45 years after mutation was granted in favour of the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Telangana Land Revenue Act.

Senior Counsel Mayur Reddy, appearing for the petitioner, contended that the District Collector earlier recorded that the subject lands were not waqf properties but later, after assuming office as the Chief Commissioner of Land Administration, took a contradictory stand stating that the lands were waqf based on a waqfnama.

He further submitted that the Tahsildar’s report indicated that the Waqf Board itself had withdrawn an earlier show-cause notice relating to the lands and that the waqfnama relied upon by the authorities was doubtful and had been observed during examination to be a printed document lacking authenticity. The senior counsel submitted that the present dispute pertains only to 30 acres of land, which are supported by registered sale deeds, and that patta passbooks and e-passbooks had also been issued in respect of the property.

During the hearing, the judge questioned how the lands were purchased when they were reflected in the Section 22-A prohibitory list and also raised concerns regarding the issuance of patta passbooks in the name of a person who had allegedly sold the land two decades earlier. Responding to the query, the senior counsel submitted that patta passbooks merely indicate possession while title flows from registered sale deeds. Observing that the vendors and other necessary parties had not been impleaded, and that their presence was essential for effective adjudication of the dispute, the judge directed the petitioner to implead the vendors and other concerned parties.