The division bench agreed with the contention of the board that the acquittal was based on a compromise and that the candidate had suppressed the information
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has upheld the decision of Telangana State Level Police Recruitment Board in rejecting the selection of a 29-year-old candidate as a constable on the ground that he suppressed information of an FIR registered against him on the charges of moral turpitude.
The division bench set aside the orders of the single bench, which had earlier directed the board to issue appointment orders to the candidate on the ground that he was acquitted from the rape case in the trial court, upon his compromise with the complainant and marrying her. She had earlier complained that he cheated her in the name of love, and refused to marry her after she became pregnant.
The division bench agreed with the contention of the board that the acquittal was based on a compromise and that the candidate had suppressed the information. The board argued that such a person was not fit to be employed in a disciplined force as such the police.
Nagaram scam: HC summons cop
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court on Monday directed constable Venkateshwarlu of the Maheshwaram police station to appear before the court on Tuesday for allegedly threatening a person who jad approached the High Court seeking an inquiry commission into the Nagaram land where property was illegally purchased by certain officers.
Vadthya Ramulu, claiming ownership of around 10 acres in Survey No. 194 had approached the High Court seeking an inquiry commission into the transactions. He contended was that his land details were deleted in the online land records via the previous Bhu Bharati portal without notice or intimation. The High Court last week reserved orders in the petition.
Dr Vijayalakshmi, counsel for the petitioner, on Monday sought a lunch motion petition before the Justice K. Lakshman Bench and complaining that the Maheshwaram police inspector had made more than 10 calls to Ramulu to come to the police station along with his Aadhaar card. When Ramulu refused to go to the police station, the constable threatened the petitioner with arrest.
The judge directed government counsel to inquire with the Maheshwaram police station house officer (SHO) and inform the court. Government counsel submitted that the person who called the petitioner was not the SHO but a constable. The court then summoned the constable to appear before the court.
