Habeas Plea Can’t Be Filed If Staffer Absconds: High Court

Hyderabad:A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court faulted the abuse of the writ of habeas corpus invoking the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of the constitutional court over a simple case of an employee leaving service. The panel comprising Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice Gadi Praveen Kumar was dealing with a writ petition filed by Provash Bera, who sought directions against the Charminar police station house officer, alleging failure to trace Pradeep Vallabh, a 29-year-old gold worker, despite registration of an FIR. The petitioner contended that inaction of the police in not initiating search despite the FIR was violative under the Constitution. Opposing the plea, government pleader Swaroop Oorilla contended that there was no specific pleading in the affidavit alleging illegal detention of Vallabh by any authority or private individual. He furthered contend that the pleadings merely disclosed that Vallabh had left the petitioner’s shop without leaving any details of his whereabouts. He contended that the FIR did not disclose any wrongdoing on the part of Vallabh, rendering the habeas corpus petition wholly misconceived. The panel observed that it was a settled principle of law that a writ of habeas corpus can be entertained only in cases of illegal detention or unlawful confinement. Speaking for the panel, Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya held that merely because an adult individual had left his employment or place of work, the same cannot be a ground to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Holding that the petitioner had other remedies available under law, the panel declined to entertain the writ petition and dismissed the same.

Cops restrained on hookah centre plea

Justice N. Tukaramji of the Telangana High Court issued directions restraining the police and the special operations team (SOT) from intervening in the business of Park Vue, a Gachibowli-based establishment serving flavoured hookah. The judge was dealing with a writ petition alleging unlawful police interference. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the police was arbitrary interfering with the business and there was no violation of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003. Opposing the plea, the state argued that while the petitioner had a licence to run a restaurant, it had no specific permission to serve flavoured hookah and had not disclosed the ingredients used, raising apprehensions of possible drug mixing. Rejecting the arguments, the judge observed that no statute contemplated a specific licence for operating a hookah parlour. The judge clarified that while the police were free to investigate and take action under the NDPS Act if there was concrete information regarding drug usage, they could not act on mere presumptions without proper inquiry and due process. The judge held that only compliance with designated smoking areas and licence for charcoal usage was required.

No action on BJP leader for posts on Rahul

Justice E.V. Venugopal of the Telangana High Court refused to entertain a writ plea seeking action against a BJP functionary for allegedly circulating morphed and fabricated photographs of senior Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Facebook. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Bommaraju Narsing, advocate. The petitioner alleged that a Facebook account operated by Srikanth Reddy Madu, stated to be a BJP functionary, deliberately posted and circulated morphed images in violation of the BNS and the Information Technology Act. The petitioner contended that despite submitting a written complaint, the respondent authorities failed to take action or register an FIR, which was in violation of the rulings of the apex court. He sought a direction to the Director General of Police to register an FIR and initiate criminal proceedings against the accused. After hearing the submissions, the judge refused to delve into the merits of the allegations and declined to exercise its writ jurisdiction in the matter. The judge granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate court by way of a private complaint, in accordance with law.

Plea claims GHMC inaction

Justice Lakshmi Narayan Alishetty of the Telangana High Court took on file a plea alleging inaction on the part of GHMC in preventing alleged illegal and unauthorised constructions by Meridian School at Madhapur, Serilingampally mandal. The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Umesh Lunker and another. According to the petition, the petitioners were owners of land in Survey No. 14/1, Madhapur, where Meridian School was allegedly carrying out construction activities without obtaining a sanctioned building plan from the competent authorities. It was contended that the petitioners submitted a detailed representation requesting the authorities to restrain the school management from proceeding with further construction. Despite the lapse of several years, no action was taken. The petitioner contended that the unauthorised constructions had continued unchecked due to administrative apathy. Counsel appearing for the respondents contended that the school had not deviated from the permissions granted. The judge posted the matter for further hearing.