Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 112 To 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 210Burden Under Customs Act To Prove Dutiable/ Prohibited Goods Not Meant For Smuggling Lies On Person Found In Possession: Telangana High CourtShaik Mohammed Sadiq vs The Principal Commissioner of Customs & batchCitation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 111The Telangana High Court recently upheld the action of Customs officials seizing gold...
Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 112 To 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 210
Shaik Mohammed Sadiq vs The Principal Commissioner of Customs & batch
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 111
The Telangana High Court recently upheld the action of Customs officials seizing gold bars worth over Rs 2.3 crore from petitioners who had arrived in India at the Rajiv Gandhi International Airport in Hyderabad, from Bangkok.
The Court's reasoning hinged on the Customs Act, which places burden of proof on the person from whose possession the dutiable or prohibited goods, as the case may be, are seized (Section 123).
Sri. Kalvakuntla Chandrashekar Rao vs. State of TS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 112
The Telangana High Court has dismissed the petition moved by former Chief Minister K. Chandrasekhar Rao, challenging the formation of a one-man Commission to look into alleged irregularities arising out of power procurement during his government between 2014 to 2023.
The Justice L Narsimha Reddy Commission was formed to probe the correctness and propriety of decisions related to procurement of power from Chattisgarh, the establishment of the Bhadradri Thermal Power Station (BTPS), and the establishment of the Yadadri Thermal Power Station (YTPS).
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 113
The Telangana High Court has held that an accused public servant cannot be convicted for bribery offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, solely based on the recovery of bribe money.
The judgment was delivered by Justice K. Surender in a criminal appeal filed by the accused/government official Narsimlu, challenging conviction order passed by the trial court for demanding bribe of Rs. 5,000 from the complainant to fix boundaries in land records.
Naveena Educational Society vs. State of TS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 114
The Telangana High Court has passed interim direction to the State and the University Grants Commission (UGC) directing them to take action against the Malla Reddy University, Center of Excellence for Commerce and Design an off-campus centre of the Malla Reddy University, for having been established without the prior sanction from the State of Telangana and the University Grants Commission.
The order was passed by Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy in a plea filed by the Naveena Educational Society and Prathibha Degree College praying for the immediate closure of the Malla Reddy University, Center of Excellence.
Shaik Mohammed Khasim @ Khashu vs, State of AP
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 115
The Telangana High Court has held that the absence of independent witnesses does not automatically warrant the acquittal of an accused when the allegations are grave, such as rape. The Court reiterated that when the narration of the victim did not disclose any witnesses, the Court cannot assume to the contrary.
“Even accepting that the shop was in a busy place, according to the victim she was assaulted and she lost consciousness for some time. In the said circumstances, when it is not the case of the accused that at the time when the alleged assault or dragging the victim into the shop, there were any neighbours or anyone else present, the argument that independent witnesses were not examined by the Police during the investigation, does not hold water. Court cannot assume that people were present and that they were not examined, unless stated by witnesses.”
M/S. Lignite Power Pvt. Ltd. vs M/S Totale Global Private Ltd
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 116
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy held that the provisions of the MSMED Act, 2006 will prevail over the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The bench held that even if parties have an arbitration agreement, if the seller falls under the purview of the MSMED, it has the right to seek resolution through the designated authority for its claims.
Chakali Bhagyamma vs. State Of Telangana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 117
In a landmark decision, the Telangana High Court permitted a 12-year-old rape victim to terminate her 26-week pregnancy. This ruling came in response to a writ petition filed by the mother of the victim, against the Superintendent of Gandhi Hospital, Hyderabad, who had initially refused to perform the medical termination of pregnancy.
“…there cannot be any doubt that the victim girl would be subjected to mental trauma if she is forced to continue pregnancy against her wish; the mother of the victim girl is stated to be a domestic worker. If the victim girl is not allowed to terminate her pregnancy, she has to continue pregnancy until the child is delivered and may have to face not only physical and mental health issues but also social stigma. It has been recognized by the various Courts including the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as discussed above, that right to choice of a pregnant woman to continue pregnancy or terminate it is one of the facets of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.” Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy held.
M/s.Pipelic Energy Software India Pvt.Ltd. Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 118
The Telangana High Court has held that deductions cannot be availed on expenditures incurred for overseeing the project of holding a company.
The bench of Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty has observed that, as per Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the prerequisites for allowing deduction are that the expenditure should have been incurred in respect of a business carried on by the assessee and should be spent wholly and exclusively for its own business.
Babu Benhur.R vs, State of TS.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 119
The Telangana High Court has exposed serious irregularities in the admission process for law colleges conducted by the Convenor of TSLAWCET and PGLCET. The court, while addressing three writ petitions (W.P. Nos. 43521, 40827, and 43048 of 2022), uncovered an illegal method of seat allotment that deprived deserving candidates of opportunities in their preferred law colleges.
While the court directed for seats to be kept vacant for students who were deprived of admissions, it refused to set aside the entire process.
Nimmagadda Prasad Vs. State through CBI
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 120
The Telangana High Court has dismissed a criminal petition seeking to quash the proceedings initiated against Nimmagadda Prasad, an industrialist and key accused in the Vanpic Project case.
The case, which has its roots in the politics of erstwhile united Andhra Pradesh, involves allegations of quid pro quo investments and fraudulent land allotments.
Nandyala Vaidehi vs. State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 121
The Telangana High Court has appointed the wife of a man who was in a vegetative state as his legal guardian.
The order was passed by Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy in a writ petition, which was filed raising the parens patriae jurisdiction of the Court. Under parens patriae, the State has a paternal and protective role over its citizens.
It was pleaded that the petitioner may be appointed as the legal guardian of her husband's property under peculiar circumstances and in the absence of any legislation on the matter.
The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others Versus M/s.Himani Limited and Others.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 122
The Telangana High Court has held that the 10% duty is leviable on Himani Navaratan Oil and Himani Gold Turmeric Ayurvedic Cream as they are classified as ayurvedic medicine and not cosmetics.
The bench of Justice P.Sam Koshy and Justice N.Tukaramji has observed that the rapper in whom the cream is sold very emphatically highlights it as an ayurvedic medicine. The rapper also clearly indicates that the cream is highly effective for cracked skin, pimples, boils, and numerous other skin blemishes. Nowhere did the rapper claim it to be a cosmetic product or a product that could enhance the complexion or fairness. The licensing authority having granted a license for the product as an ayurvedic drug, the manufacture, sale, and distribution of the product as a drug and not a cosmetic are established, and it is being marketed only as a drug and not as a cosmetic.
Telangana Urdu Working Journalists Union vs. State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 123
The High Court of Telangana has addressed the issue of media accreditation based on language by examining the validity of G.O.Ms.No.239 dated 15.07.2016, which allocated Accreditation Cards to working journalists based on the language of their newspapers.
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti, held that the language-based criteria for media accreditation were indeed arbitrary and violated Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The court found that the language of a newspaper, irrespective of a number of pages or number of copies in circulation, cannot furnish reasonable and just criteria for extending the benefit of accreditation.
M/s. Naolin Infrastructure Private Limited vs. M/s Infinity Projects
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 124
In a recent judgment, the Telangana High Court has provided crucial clarity on the jurisdiction for applications seeking termination of an arbitrator's mandate under Section 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act).
Chief Justice Alok Aradhe clarified that applications for termination of an arbitrator's mandate under Section 14 of the A&C Act should be filed before the District Court, not the High Court. This decision emphasizes that despite the High Court's power to appoint arbitrators under Section 11(6) of the Act, it does not have jurisdiction to hear applications for terminating an arbitrator's mandate under Section 14.
Sri Kantilal vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Rep by the Senior Manager,
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 125
The Telangana High Court has reaffirmed the principle that an appellant has an absolute right to withdraw an appeal, and the court must grant such a request without imposing conditions, provided certain circumstances are met.
The Division Bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice M.G.Priyadarsini held, that the power of the High Court in granting permission to withdraw an appeal under Order XXIII Rule 1(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is very limited.
Yakkanti Adinarayana Reddy vs. Yakkanti Adinarayana Reddy
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 126
The Telangana High Court has clarified the procedural requirements for invoking arbitration under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court held that a formal application for referring parties to arbitration must be filed before submitting the first statement on the substance of the dispute, typically the written statement in a suit.
Smt.Sharada Devi Kedia vs Kisna Avenues Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 127
The Telangana High Court has elaborated on the interpretation of "commercial disputes" under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The Court clarified that any dispute arising out of a commercial agreement cannot be termed a 'Commercial Dispute' as long as only the contracting parties will be affected.
“In essence, a commercial dispute would be one where the nature of the agreement or the consequence arising therefrom would take the effect of the agreement beyond the private sphere of the contracting parties and create a ripple-effect of commercial movement beyond the main actors to the agreement. The specific nomenclatures of the agreements in section 2(1)(c) indicates that a dispute cannot readily be presumed to be a commercial dispute. The object and specific clauses of the agreement would always be the determinant of whether the source-agreement fits into 1 or more of the sub-clauses to section 2(1)(c) of the 2015 Act,” held Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice M.G.Priyadarsini
The Union Of India, Secbad And 3 Others vs M/S. Suntechno Constructions
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 128
The Telangana High Court division bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice M. G. Priyadarsini has held the arbitral tribunal has full authority to award interest from the date of the award until the date of payment, regardless of any contrary decision by the parties. If the award is silent on the rate of interest, the award holder is entitled to an interest rate 2% higher than the market rate.
Guntupalli Srinivas Rao vs. The State of Telangana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 129
The Telangana High Court has granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners accused of cheating and breach of trust in a real estate transaction.
The case stemmed from a complaint against a married couple running a company under M/s.EVK Projects Pvt. Ltd. The complainant, Raghavendar, and another individual had entered into an agreement with the petitioners to purchase two villas. When the petitioners couldn't deliver on the agreement and failed to refund the money as promised, criminal charges were filed under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 5 of the Telangana State Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 (TSPDFE Act).
Non-Filing Of GST Return Due To Technical Glitch, Bank Can't Be Penalised: Telangana High Court
M/s. Standard Chartered Bank Vs. The Principal Commissioner of Central Tax & others.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 130
The Telangana High Court has held that the petitioner bank could not file its return in the GST portal because of a technical glitch and cannot be saddled with demand, penalty, and interest.
The bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao has observed that it was the duty of the department to keep their portal functional. If the portal was not functional or had a technical glitch, and because of that, the petitioner was compelled to file a return in the portal of Telangana. The department cannot take advantage of its own wrong.
AnjumaneAlavi, Shia Imamia Ithna Ashari Akhbari Regd Society vs. State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 131
In a landmark judgment, the Telangana High Court has affirmed the right of women belonging to the Akbhari Sect of Shia Muslims to conduct religious activities in the Ibadat Khana located in Darulshifa, Hyderabad.
The ruling came in response to Writ Petition, filed by 'AnjumaneAlavi Shia Imamia Ithna Ashari Akhbari Regd Society' challenging the denial of access to women for conducting Majlis, Jashans, and other religious prayers in the premises.
Anantha Rameshwari Devi vs State of TS and Batch
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 132
In a significant ruling aimed at addressing widespread issues in the document registration process, the Telangana High Court has issued comprehensive guidelines to streamline procedures and reduce unnecessary litigation.
The common order, delivered by Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar on July 9, in a batch of 24 writ petitions, addresses recurring problems faced by citizens in getting their documents registered and provides clear directives to registration authorities.
Sri Parvez Adi Debara vs M/s. Innovation Builders
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 133
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice P.Sam Koshy and Justice Sambasivarao Naidu has held the legal heirs of a deceased person who was a party to an arbitration agreement fall under the definition of "legal representative" as specified in Section 2(1)(g) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The bench held that it encompasses persons who manage or claim to inherit the deceased's estate.
SUOMOTU W.P (PIL).No.3 of 2023
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 134
The High Court of Telangana, led by Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao recently addressed the ongoing issue of stray dogs in Hyderabad. The court was hearing two Public Interest Litigations (PILs), including a suo motu case initiated based on a news report about stray dogs attacking children and elderly residents in the state.
The court had previously directed the State Government to constitute a committee for implementing the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023. In response, the government formed the State Animal Birth Control Implementation and Monitoring Committee through a government order dated July 16, 2024.
Abhinay Reddy M, Shreya Devaki and Senior Advocate Vikram Pooserla
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 135'
The Telangana High Court has issued an interim order suspending the State Bank of India's (SBI) decision to classify the account of Ind-Barath Power Gencom Ltd. (Gencom) as fraudulent. This order comes in response to writ petitions filed by Raghu Rama Krishna Raju and Dr. Indira Priyadarshini, both part-time non-executive directors of Gencom.
Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy passed the order in a plea calling for the records of the Fraud Identification Committee of SBI and for suspending its findings.
WRIT PETITION NO.41756 OF 2016
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 136
The Telangana High Court has delivered a significant judgment quashing Schedule E of the Telangana Media Accreditation Rules, 2016, which categorized small newspapers into four tiers for accreditation purposes.
The division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao found this categorization arbitrary and unjustified, particularly in its denial of accreditation to journalists working at district and constituency levels for certain categories of small newspapers.
Jakka Venkat Reddy v. The State of Telangana and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 137
The Court, through Justice T. Vinod Kumar, clarified that a "meeting" requires an actual assembly of persons, and without a congregation of members before the presiding officer, it cannot be said that a meeting was convened. The mere scheduling or postponement of a meeting does not equate to its convening or failure to convene due to lack of quorum.
“Out of the total number of members, in order to constitute a valid quorum for the meeting to be convened, two-thirds of the total numbers of members viz., 18 members are required to be present, by congregating at the place whereat the meeting is to he held before the presiding officer. It is only when such congregation takes place and the Presiding Officer on taking head-count finds that required number of members are there to constitute a quorum at the first instance or adjourns the same to some other time of the same day, only in such a circumstance would have to be construed as first meeting. Without such congregation of the members before the Presiding Officer, it cannot be said that a meeting was convened.”
Joshi Madhavi v UOI and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 138
While hearing the remission plea of a man serving a life sentence in a murder case, the Telangana High Court said that if the state government–which is empowered to recommend remission, approaches the Centre for its consent, then it can't keep the same pending and "withhold it arbitrarily".
The high court also emphasized that in case the Centre differs from the State government on grant of remission, then it must provide cogent reasons for doing so instead of making "bald averments" like the convict will commit the offence again.
Sri Avantika Contractors (I) Limited Versus Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (GST) and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 139
The Telangana High Court has held that GST is not payable on consideration received towards 'works contract service of construction' executed in the Maldives.
The bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao has observed that the location of immovable property is located in the Maldives or outside India. Hence, the place of supply shall determine the 'location of the recipient'. The place of supply of services is Addu, Maldives. The 'location of recipient' is already interpreted by holding that, as per Section 2(14)(b), it will be the 'fixed establishment' of National Buildings Construction Corporation Ltd. (NBCCL), which will be the location of the recipient.
NRIs Not Exempted From Mandatory Faceless Procedure: Telangana High Court
Sri Venkataramana Reddy Patloola Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 140
The Telangana High Court has held that the NRIs are not exempted from following mandatory faceless procedure.
The bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao has observed that the taxpayer is nowhere distinguished between NRIs and Indian citizens. The reassessment notice issued under Section 148 must comply with the requirement of the scheme whether or not the taxpayer is an NRI or Indian citizen.
WRIT PETITION No.19230 OF 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 141
While hearing a writ petition against an eviction order challenged on the ground of procedural irregularities, the Telangana High Court highlighted the distinction between the maintainability and entertainability of a writ petition, shedding light on the discretionary powers of the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
A single judge bench of Justice K Lakshman held that while the writ petition filed by the petitioner was indeed maintainable, it could not be entertained.
Bajranglal Agarwal vs. Smt.Susheela Agarwal and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 142
The Telangana High Court has upheld the rejection of a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, emphasizing that a plaint must disclose a clear right to sue and not merely an illusion or mirage of a cause of action.
“The expression “Cause of Action” has been described to mean every fact which would be necessary for the plaintiff to prove, if traversed, in order to support the plaintiff's right to judgment. In other words, cause of action consists of a bundle of material facts which are necessary for the plaintiff to prove in order to entitle the plaintiff to the relief claimed. For ascertaining cause of action, the averments made in the plaint must be read in its entirety - and not in isolation - and must be held to be correct. Simply put, the plaintiff must prove its case on the averments made in the plaint and further the relief claimed must have a real nexus with the cause of action pleaded. 17 MB,J & MGP,J CCCA.No.62 of 2024 The Plaint must disclose a clear Right to Sue – not an Illusion or Mirage of a Cause of Action,” the Division Bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice M. G. Priyadarsini noted.
A.S. No.320 OF 2023
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 143
The Telangana High Court has held that the incapacity of a non-party to a legal proceeding can be equated to 'legal disability' under sections 6 and 7 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
The order was passed by a division bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice M.G.Priyadarsini in an I.A. filed in an appeal suit, praying to condone the delay of 428 days in filing the appeal. The petitioner/appellants pleaded that they were third parties who were not originally parties to the suit before the trial court and hence were not aware about the proceedings.
Narayana Educational Institutions v. Mrs Paruchuri Janaki and Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 144
The Telangana High Court division bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice M.G. Priyadarsini has held that commercial courts are competent courts to hear the Commercial Original Petition arising from Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in terms of specified value, territorial jurisdiction and the nature of the dispute i.e., commercial dispute.
Appeal U/S 8 Of Telangana Agricultural Land (Conversion For Non-Agricultural Purpose) Act Lies Before Collector, Not RDO: High Court
Mr. B. Yedukondala Raju & another vs. State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 145
The Telangana High Court has clarified that a Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) will not have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal under Section 8 of the Telangana Agricultural Land (Conversion for Non-Agricultural Purpose) Act, 2006 (NALA).
The court held that only the District Collector or an officer not below the rank of Joint Collector has the jurisdiction to hear such appeals.
“As per Section - 8 of the NALA, appeal lies to the 'Collector'. As per Section - 2 (f) of the NALA, Collector includes 'Joint Collector or any other Officer not below the rank of the Joint Collector authorized by the Government to exercise the powers and perform the functions of the District Collector'. Likewise, Section - 2 (g) of the NALA defines 'Revenue Divisional Officer', and it means the Revenue Divisional Officer including Sub-Collector or Assistant Collector and includes any Officer not below the rank of a Revenue Divisional Officer empowered by the Government to exercise the powers and perform the functions of the Revenue Divisional Officer under the NALA. In view of the same, respondent No.3, being the Revenue Divisional Officer is not a 'Collector'. He is only a Revenue Divisional Officer. Section - 2 (f) says Collector includes 'Joint Collector', but not Sub-Collector or Assistant Collector. Therefore, RDO cannot be treated as Joint Collector,” the bench of Justice K. Lakshman explained.
ACME Cleantech Solutions Private Limited v/s Deputy Commissioner (ST) STU-1, Begumpet Division, Hyderabad and Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 146
The Telangana High Court recently quashed two show cause notices issued by the tax authority to a company, demanding tax which was already settled under the state government's One Time Settlement (OTS) scheme, while noting that there was "no allegation of fraud" committed by the company in the notices.
A division bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao in its August 28 order said, that in the "peculiar facts and circumstances of this case", after the petitioner company had availed the One Time Settlement Scheme of the state government, then it was not open for the tax authorities to issue the show cause notice to the petitioner.
Kuna Pandu Vivekanand Versus The State of Telangana, WP 11098/2024 (and connected matters)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 147
While directing the Telangana Assembly Speaker to fix a schedule of hearing to decide the disqualification pleas pending against the defecting BRS MLAs within four weeks, the High Court expressed disagreement over the argument made by the defecting MLAs and State that the Speaker cannot be directed to decide the disqualification petition within a certain time.
“If the contention of the learned Advocate General and other learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents that this Court can never give directions to the Speaker to decide disqualification within a time frame, is to be accepted, then the question that would arise is “how long the inaction or indecision of the Speaker to be tolerated by this Court.”, the bench comprising Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy asked.
Mrs. Kurnuda Sreenivasa Sasikanth vs. M/S Ananya Child Development and Early
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 148
The Telangana High Court Bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe has held that a valid notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is a mandatory requirement for invoking arbitration, and its absence renders an arbitration application under Section 11 of the Act non-maintainable.
Writ Petition No.9720 of 2013
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 149
The Telangana High Court has reiterated that under peculiar circumstances when no reasons are provided in an order, relegating a litigant to the remedy of appeal would not be effective as no grounds have been furnished.
“Ordinarily, we would have relegated the petitioner to avail of the alternative remedy. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the remedy of appeal is not an efficacious remedy as the impugned order is bereft of any reasons and a person aggrieved is required to be apprised of the grounds on which the order was passed against him. In the instant case, in case the petitioner is relegated to the alternative remedy of appeal, the remedy of appeal would not be effective as no grounds have been furnished on the basis of which the order has been passed against the petitioner.”
X v Y
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 150
The Telangana High Court dismissed a woman's plea seeking transfer of the divorce proceedings from Nirmal to Hyderabad after noting that free public transport is available to women in the state.
The high court passed the order in a petition filed by the wife, seeking transfer of the divorce proceedings from the civil judge's court in Nirmal district to either the family court in R.R. District at L.B. Nagar or the family court in Hyderabad.
Driving Vehicle Without Number Plate Not 'Cheating' U/S 420 IPC: Telangana High Court
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9953 of 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 151
While quashing a cheating case registered against a two wheeler driver, the Telangana High Court said that the allegation of driving a vehicle without a number plate does not attract Section 420 IPC.
A single judge bench of Justice K. Sujana noted that the sole allegation against the accused–of driving without a number plate, does not fall under the purview of Section 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of IPC.
V. Sreenivas Reddy v. B.L. Rathnamma
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 152
The Telangana High Court division bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice M.G. Priyadarshini, while dismissing a Civil Revision Petition (CRP), has held that the Arbitral Tribunal is the fulcrum and the facilitator under Section 27 of the Arbitration Act. The Bench further held that only Arbitral Tribunal can make a representation before a Court under Section 27(5).
Section 27 of the Arbitration Act pertains to the assistance of the Court in taking evidence. The Arbitral Tribunal, or a party with the prior permission of the Tribunal may move an application seeking the Court's assistance.
Kohinoor Seed Fields India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Veda Seed Sciences Pvt. Ltd. and Another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 153
In relation to commercial disputes, the Telangana High Court has observed that a plaintiff's allegations of misuse of trademark indicate the 'urgency' of court intervention and thus the requirement of pre-institution mediation provided in Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, can be dispensed or exempted with in such cases.
The Court emphasized the time-sensitive nature of IPR/trademark infringement cases. It remarked “Unlike other forms of property, where the wrongful appropriation can be quantified, infringement of IPRs is often un-quantifiable as the wrongdoer rides on the reputation and goodwill of the Mark/brand. Therefore, time is always of the essence as even a single “consumption” of the Mark by an unauthorized user can result in immeasurable injury to the owner/proprietor.”
WRIT PETITION Nos.25702, 25710 and 25832 of 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 154
While hearing a batch of pleas by certain persons seeking protection of "peaceful possession" of their properties located around Hyderabad's Durgam Cheruvu Lake, the state government told the Telangana High Court that until the lake protection committee notifies the full tank level, the properties in question will not be demolished.
A division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J Sreenivas Rao in its September 23 order noted, "The learned Special Government Pleader submits that till the aforesaid exercise is carried out, no action shall be taken for demolition of the construction raised by the petitioners. The same is placed on record. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the matter, as the same has to be adjudicated by the Lake Protection Committee".
Samiuddin @ Sami v/s State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 155
The Telangana High Court on Friday observed that the statutory bar on filing an appeal against a decision beyond 90 days under the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act can be termed the "Justice Bar", adding that the doors of justice cannot be selectively shut to a few especially where life and liberty are at stake.
The observations were made while the high court was considering whether appeals challenging the trial court's orders could be allowed after the expiry of the statutory period stipulated under section 21 of the NIA Act. For context, Section 21 pertains to the filing of appeals, wherein the second proviso to 21(5) states that "no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of the period of ninety days”
Guntupalli Srinivas Rao vs. State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 156
The Telangana High Court has set aside a remand order, emphasizing the importance of adhering to constitutional safeguards regarding arrest and production before a magistrate within 24 hours. The court held that producing an accused before a magistrate beyond the 24-hour limit without obtaining a transit warrant violates Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India.
This ruling was made in a Criminal Revision petition by Justice E.V. Venugopal. The case involved a challenge to the remand order dated 18.07.2024 passed against the petitioner (accused No.2).
Smt. T. Ramadevi, W/o.T. Srinivas Goud vs. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 157
Addressing the subject of detention and production of accused persons, the Telangana High Court recently said that the 24-hour period for producing a person before a magistrate is to be calculated from the moment a person is apprehended, not from when the arrest is officially recorded.
A division bench comprising of Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice N. Tukaramji said, "Accordingly, this Bench has no hesitation in reaching to the conclusion that question No.1 as regards the commencement of the period of apprehension is concerned, it is held that the period of apprehension is also to be taken into consideration for the purpose of calculating the period of 24 hours as is envisaged under Section 57 of Cr.P.C. In other words, 24 hours is not to be calculated from the time of the official arrest being shown by the police personnel in the arrest memo, but from the time he was initially apprehended or taken into custody".
Case no.: AS 32 of 2016
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 158
While hearing a matter concerning a property dispute, the Telangana High Court reiterated that an act which is done in violation of an injunction order is invalid and should be undone by the court putting back the parties in the same position as they were before such an order was passed.
In reiterating so, the High Court dismissed an appeal filed against a decree for specific performance, and held that the appellant purchased the property in the teeth of the trial court's injunction order which disentitled the party from pursuing any further reliefs.
COMCA 1 OF 2022
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 159
The Telangana High Court has clarified that Section 105 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 only contemplates a one-way transfer of pending proceedings from the erstwhile state of Andhra Pradesh to the newly formed state of Telangana, and not vice versa.
In doing so, the high court dismissed an appeal challenging the jurisdiction of a Commercial Court in Hyderabad to hear a suit for recovery of dues. The Court rejected the appellant's contention that the case should have been transferred to Andhra Pradesh due to the dispute having originated in Kadapa, which fell within the territorial jurisdiction of AP following the bifurcation.
WRIT PETITION No.3681 of 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 160
The Telangana High Court has held that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has the authority to issue summons under Section 50(2) and (3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) even after a complaint has been filed before a Special Court. The court held that such summons do not violate Article 20(3) of the Constitution and that the ED does not require prior permission from the Special Court to conduct further investigations or issue summons in ongoing cases.
It held: “The power conferred to the Enforcement Directorate to conduct further investigation/ issuing of summons to trade proceeds of the crime arising out of an offence under Section 3 of PMLA, cannot be restricted upon filing of the complaint on the file of Special Court, since even after filing of the complaint under Section 44 of the PMLA Act, the investigation agency is having power to file any subsequent complaint, in respect of further investigation that may be conducted to bring any further evidence against any accused."
X v/s Union of India & Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 161
The Telangana High Court in an interim order permitted a Telugu film producer to approach the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting for removal of certain allegedly defamatory content about her on social media.
The petitioner has claimed that YouTuber Harsha Sai Kathira in the guise of a script meeting, allegedly sexually assaulted her, recorded the entire incident and went on to publish "photos and videos" of it online.
Commissioner of Income Tax III vs M/S.V.B.C.Ferro Alloys Ltd
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 162
The Telangana High Court has held that the capital expenditure made prior to June 1998, for purchasing shares in any 'infrastructure facility', cannot be included in an assessee's total income.
A division bench of Justices Sujoy Paul and Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao reasoned,
“The capital expenditure for purchasing shares falls under the category of infrastructure facilities and shall not be included in total income. This is because merely purchasing shares does not contribute to the income of the respondent/assessee. Since it does not count as income, no amount needs to be paid in taxes.”
Dr K A Paul Kilari Anand Paul vs. The State of Telangana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 163
The Telangana High Court on Wednesday (October 23) declined to grant interim relief in a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking to restrain the 'Hyderabad Disaster Response and Asset Protection Agency' (HYDRAA)' from demolishing any buildings without following due procedure.
The high court did so after noting the State's submission that due process was being followed by the authorities.
Mrs. Bibi Hajjar Dashti vs Mr. Syed Ali Asghar Bolooki
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 164
The Telangana High Court Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe And Justice J.Sreenivas Rao held that impartiality is an essential attribute of a Receiver. Therefore, normally one of the parties to a lis should not be appointed as Receiver without consent of the other parties unless a very special case is made out.
M/s K.D. SOLAR SYSTEMS v. M/s. Mytrah Energy India Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 165
The Telangana High Court Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe affirmed that Sub-section (1) of Section 16 provides that the Arbitral Tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction, “including any objections” with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement. Section 16 is an inclusive provision, which would comprehend all preliminary issues touching upon the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal. The issue of limitation is a jurisdictional issue, which would be required to be decided by the arbitrator under Section 16, and not the High Court at the pre-reference stage under Section 11 of the Act.
The Andhra Pradesh State Trading Corporation Ltd. v. M/S. Hima Bindu Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 166
The Telangana High Court bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao has held that an interim order passed by an arbitral tribunal under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, restraining the encashment of a bank guarantee does not warrant interference under section 34 of the Act. The court also held that section 34 does not permit the court to act as an appellate body or correct errors of law or fact.
Srinivasa Resorts Limited vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax, A.P.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 167
The Telangana High Court has held that the expenditure incurred by a hotel on replacement of damaged items is a current expenditure, allowable under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Section 37 of Income Tax Act states that any business expenditure, excluding capital expenditure and the individual's personal expenses, that is spent for the business's operations shall be applicable for deduction from business income.
WP 12116 of 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 168
While quashing an order of a Mandal Legal Services Committee (MLSC) after noting that it was not a compromise/settlement award but in the nature of an execution petition pertaining to a property dispute suit, Telangana High Court said that the committee had exceeded its jurisdiction.
In doing so the high court reiterated that Lok Adalats, including the MLSC, are meant solely for conciliation and lack the power to make adjudicatory decisions. For context a mandal is an administrative unit below the district level consisting of a group of villages.
Amgothy Vinod vs. State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 169
The Telangana High Court set aside a man's conviction for allegedly raping a girl for eight months after noting that if the girl was– as claimed by her, detained for eight months and her limbs were tied, her body would show signs of forcible detention which was not the case- raising suspicion about this version.
In doing so the court further observed that there was an absolute "lull" between the time the girl allegedly went missing and the time that she ran away from the accused, pointing to the fact that the prosecution's witnesses were coming up with a "tainted version". The court also observed that whatever was the actual version was suppressed by the prosecution.
M. Lakshma Naik and others vs. The Transmission Corporation of Telangana Limited and others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 170
While upholding the validity of an order issued by the Transmission Corporation of Telangana Limited (TRANSCO) deleting beneficial provisions regarding service weightage for promotion to Additional Assistant Engineer posts, the Telangana High Court ruled that the corporation has the power to amend the relevant service regulations.
A division bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao upheld the validity of T.O.O. (Jt-Secy-Per) Ms.No.1475 dated September 8, 2022 issued by TRANSCO which deleted the beneficial provision as per which if a sub-engineer had commenced work before getting their diploma, half of that pre-diploma service time would be counted while considering promotion.
Babulal Jain vs The Income Tax Officer
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 171
The Telangana High Court has held that for purposes of taxation, “accumulated profits” of a company are to be calculated after adjusting depreciation as per the Income Tax Act, 1961.
In ruling so, a division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao cited two rulings of the Bombay High Court which held that “depreciation as granted in accordance with the rates prescribed by the Income-tax Act would have to be deducted for ascertaining the accumulated profits.”
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-III Hyderabad v. M/s. Satiofi Healthcare India Private Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 172
The Telangana High Court has held that the amount received by the developer of Hepatitis-B vaccine, under a co-marketing agreement with PFIZER Company, is a capital receipt not liable to tax.
A division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao reasoned that the developer-assessee's right to promote, market, distribute or sell the vaccine or a new competitive product to a third party was taken away under the agreement.
The Telangana Legislative Assembly v/s Alleti Maheshwar Reddy and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 173
The Telangana High Court on Friday (November 22) set aside a September order of the single judge which had directed the Secretary of the legislative Assembly to place the disqualification pleas pending against MLAs–who defected from Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS)–before the Assembly Speaker to fix a schedule of hearing within four weeks.
In doing so the high court said that Speaker of the Assembly exercises power under the Tenth schedule (which pertains to disqualification on ground of defection) to the Constitution which is subject to judicial review. It added that while the Speaker is required to decide disqualification petitions within a reasonable time, but what would be this time depends on facts of each case. In the present matter the high court asked the Speaker to decide the disqualification petitions within a reasonable time while keeping in "mind the concept of reasonable time"
PSM Energy Pvt. Ltd. Versus ZAM Engineering and Logistics Pvt. Ltd.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 174
The Telangana High Court bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sreenivas Rao, affirmed that where multiple agreements are interconnected and form part of a single commercial transaction then only the presence of an arbitration clause in one or more agreements can justify referring all disputes, involving all agreements and parties, to arbitration. This is true even if some agreements lack an arbitration clause. In this case, the court found that agreements were not interconnected.
Praveen Kumar and Others vs. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Chief Secretary, General Administration Department, Hyderabad and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 175
The Telangana High Court has, in a case pertaining to regularization of contractual employees, declared Section 10-A of the Regulation of Appointments to Public Services and Rationalization of Staff Pattern and Pat Structure) Act, 1994 as ultra vires.
The provision was challenged for allegedly regularizing illegal appointments made on contractual basis. Division bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao stated Section 10-A is contrary to the Education Service Rules.
A.Bhaskar Reddy v/s Bar Council of India and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 176
While disposing of a PIL highlighting "unreasonable delay" in admissions to law courses in the state, the Telangana High Court has asked various respondents including the State authorities to make a "sincere" endeavour to adhere to guidelines of the University Grants CommissionBar Council of India with respect to admissions in law schools.
The court passed the order while disposing of a plea asking for a direction in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare undue delay in admissions to law courses in Telangana for the year 2023-24 as "unreasonable discriminatory arbitrary breach" of substantive Legitimate Expectations and which is violative of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India. The plea sought a direction to the Respondents to strictly adhere to the academic calendar by completing the counselling and admissions to LLB and LLM and other Law Courses before July each year beginning with academic year 2024-25 as per UGC norms by undertaking steps as may be necessary.
MSEFC Must Decide Question On Limitation Before Adjudicating Dispute On Merits: Telangana High Court
M/s K/12 Techno Services Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s Brahma Teja Paper
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 177
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice P. Sam. Koshy, while hearing a petition filed under Article 227, has held that the issues of maintainability, particularly the question of limitation, are to be decided by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC) before proceeding to adjudicate the dispute on merits.
AP State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited v. Income Tax Officer
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 178
The Telangana High Court has held that the benefit of exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, can be denied only on income from such investments made by charitable or religious institutions, which are in violation of Section 13(1)(d) of the Act.
Section 11(1) of the Act mandates that any income derived from the property held under the trust wholly for charitable purpose or religious purpose is exempted from the total income to the extent to which such income is applied to charitable or religious purpose in India.
M.Vinayak vs Dy Commissioner Of Income Tax
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 179
The Telangana High Court has held that the loss of fixed deposit investments by an assessee does not qualify as a 'trading loss' for the purposes of claiming deduction from income under Section 28 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Under Section 28, one may deduct expenses that are fully and solely incurred in the course of operating a business or practicing a profession.
Chintapalli Subrahmanyam and others vs. State of Telangana and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 180
While hearing the Musi Riverfront Development Project case, the Telangana High Court ordered the state authorities to implement guidelines of the Supreme Court regarding issuing notices to encroachers for removal of "unauthorised constructions" in River Bed Zone, Full tank Level (FTL) and the Buffer Zone of the river.
In doing so the court underscored that it is the State's duty to protect rivers, tanks or lakes adding that since the State has already enacted the law, courts can serve as an instrument of determining the legislative intent in exercise of their powers under judicial review to protect the pristine glory of the natural resources, like the Musi River.
Arakula Yadaiah Versus Ministry of Education
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 181
Dismissing a plea by certain candidates challenging the syllabus criteria in the Guidelines for Teacher Eligibility Test claiming it to be arbitrary, the Telangana High Court observed that the guidelines framed by National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) are to ensure that competent candidates are recruited as teachers.
In doing so the court underscored that the requirement of having basic knowledge in subjects–as was required in the guidelines, which are taught to school children studying in classes I to VIII cant be termed as arbitrary
Aloor Venkat Rohan Rao v. State of Telangana & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 182
The Telangana High Court recently set aside Moosarambagh RTO's direction imposing 2% additional tax on a resident's purchase of a Mahindra XUV 700 car by labelling it to be his 'second vehicle'.
As per the Telangana Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963, vehicles that cost over Rs 20 lakh will be charged 18%. A second vehicle purchased in the name of the owner will be charged an additional 2% tax.
Nagaram Anjaiah vs. The State of Telangana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 183
While upholding an order of the single judge on removal of certain government appointed advocates, the Telangana High Court said that there was no employer-employee relation between the State and the law officers.
Notably the legislative assembly elections were held in the state in November 2023. The results were announced in December 2023 with the Congress and its allies winning the maximum number of seats against the incumbent Bharat Rashtra Samithi. The government order removing the appellants from their services was issued in June this year. The appellants contended that a change of Government–change of political party which may come into power in the general elections–does not change the character of the continuing body of the State Government and cannot en-masse discontinue the Law Officer
Telangana High Court Grants Protection From Arrest To BRS MLA In Alleged Phone Tapping Case
Thanneru Harish Rao vs. State of Telangana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 184
The Telangana High Court has directed Police officials not to arrest BRS MLA T. Harish Rao accused of allegedly tapping the phones of Politician (from BSP) and social worker Gadhagoni Chakradhar Goud.
The order was passed by Justice K. Lakshman in a criminal petition filed by Rao seeking quashing of the FIR registered against him under section 120B (criminal conspiracy), 386 (extortion), 409 (criminal breach of trust) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC and Section 66 of the IT Act.
G. Nagaraju vs State of AP
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 185
The Telangana High Court has set aside the appointment of almost 1,200 Multi Purpose Health Assistant who were reappointment to the post by way of a Government Order, in contradiction of the High Court order, which was later upheld by the Supreme Court.
"If G.O.Rt.No.1207, dated 09.10.2013, is examined in juxtaposition to the direction contained in para (d) of para 60 of the common order passed by this Court in W.P.No.15107 of 2002 and batch, it will be crystal clear that the direction was clear and candid that appointment order needs to be issued only for those candidates whose names figure in the merit list. Remaining candidates were required to be terminated. The Government in obedience of the said order initially terminated their services by G.O.Rt.No.273, dated 16.02.2012, but re-employed them by issuing G.O.Rt.No.1207. Thus, the State has undertaken an exercise of taking them back indirectly and continued them in employment by issuing G.O.Rt.No.1207 which exercise of continuance was not possible to be undertaken directly as per this Court's order in W.P.No.15107 of 2002 and batch," held division Bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao.
Patnam Narender Reddy vs. State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 186
The Telangana High Court has dismissed a plea by former MLA of BRS party Patnam Narender Reddy for quashing an order remanding him to judicial custody in connection with the alleged attack on the District Collector, Kodangal Urban Development Authority (KADA) by the residents of the Lagcherla village last month.
The court found that the Magistrate court in the present case had directed the Superintendent of Cherlapally Central Jail, to provide necessary medical assistance to the petitioner, to continue medical assistance and to provide home food to all the accused persons. It found that the magistrate court was justified in remanding the petitioner herein including the other accused.
M/S Asian Tubes Private Limited vs. State of Telangana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 187
The Telangana High Court has directed the State to take disciplinary action against revenue officials for altering revenue records and issuing a pattedar-passbook in favour of a respondent third party despite subsisting status quo orders which had been issued earlier.
“The respondent No. 1 is directed to initiate suitable disciplinary action against the Officers, who are involved in aforesaid transaction of altering the revenue records and issuing the pattedar passbook, violating the orders dated 27.03.2014 and 24.02.2015 passed by this Court in W.P.No. 91522 of 2074” held Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy.
WP(PIL) 29 of 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 188
Following incidents of multiple students being hospitalized after consuming mid-day meals provided in government-run schools between the 20th-26th of November, the Telangana High Court was on Thursday informed that the State government has taken steps to ensure adherence to food safety standards.
Additional Advocate General appearing for the State informed that apart from the committees that were to be formed under the PM Poshan Scheme, the State government had issued a memo dated 27/11/2024 for constitution of additional Committees, comprising Head Master/ Principal/ Warden and two other staff members to supervise the preparation of mid-day meals.
Mr. Vijay Kumar Kanoria vs. The State of Telangana
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 189
The High Court of Telangana has delivered an important decision on the issue regarding criminal liability of Directors and corporate governance.
In quashing the proceedings initiated against the petitioner (former Director of a pharmaceutical company), Justice K Sujana held that the petitioner could not be held responsible for alleged violations by the accused-company since he had relinquished his position as Director at the time such offences were alleged to have occurred.
Dr. Manchu Mohan Babu and Anr. vs. State of Telangana and Others
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 190
The Telangana High Court on Wednesday (December 11) in an interim order directed the Commissionerate Of Police, Hyderabad and Additional District Magistrate, Rachakonsa not to compel the presence of actor Mohan Babu in a show cause notice issued to him under section 126 of BNSS.
Section 126 BNSS states that when an Executive Magistrate receives information that any person is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity or to do any wrongful act that may probably cause a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquillity and is of opinion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding, he may, in the manner provided, require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond or bail bond for keeping the peace for such period, not exceeding one year, as the magistrate thinks fit.
Telangana High Court Upholds Cancellation Of Ex-BRS MLA's Citizenship, Imposes ₹30 Lakh Costs
Dr. Ramesh Chennamaneni vs. Union of India
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 200
Telangana High Court has dismissed a plea filed by MLA Dr Ramesh Chennamaneni with a cost of 30 lakhs, challenging an order passed by the Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, holding that the petitioner had ceased to be a citizen of India.
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy who was hearing the matter upheld the cancellation upholding that the petitioner on multiple occasions had made false misrepresentations to the Government of India and the Court and had taken the authorities for a ride.
Allu Arjun Arrest: Telangana High Court Grants Interim Bail To Allu For 4 Weeks In Stampede Case
Allu Arjun v State of Telangana and Another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 201
The Telangana High Court on Friday (December 13) granted interim bail for four weeks to actor Allu Arjun who had sought quashing of FIR in connection with a stampede which occurred outside a cinema hall in Hyderabad last week when the actor had an unscheduled visit, in which one woman also died.
After hearing the arguments for around two hours Justice Juvvadi Sridevi while dictating the order said, "I'm inclined to give interim bail, for a limited period, following the Arnab Goswami case. Bonds to be given to the Jail superintendent since arrest is made".
Dr. KA Paul v State
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 202
While hearing a PIL petition concerning women's safety which also seeks speedy trials in rape cases and details of pending case, the Telangana High Court on Tuesday (December 17) orally asked the litigant to give particulars of the survivors whose complaints were allegedly not being registered as FIRs by police officers so that action can be taken.
In the previous hearing on October 25, the petitioner had made a prayer in his application for amendment that complaints of the women, who are allegedly subjected to rape, was not being registered as first information reports; however the court had noted that the petitioner "had not furnished any particulars of the victims, whose complaints are not being registered as first information reports" and hence no direction as prayed for by the petitioner can be granted.
Athota Sashi Mohan v/s IOCL and P.Vijayalakshmi and Anr. v/s IOCL
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 203
Directing the Indian Oil Corporation Ltd to vacate the premises of certain persons for continuing to occupy it despite expiry of the lease, the Telangana High Court pulled up the public sector undertaking for "quietly continuing to squat on the petitioners' land" without having any right is an overt act requiring the court's interference under Article 226.
In doing so the high court reiterated the court's power to interfere in a contractual dispute between a private individual and the State/Public Authority in a petition filed under Article 226 if it is infringing upon fundamental rights conferred under Article 14 of the Constitution.
KT Rama Rao v/s State of Telangana (ACB)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 204
The Telangana High Court in an interim order on Friday (December 20) has granted protection from arrest to BRS MLA KT Rama Rao till December 30, in an FIR over alleged irregularities in the conduct of Formula-E race in Hyderabad when BRS was in power.
Issuing notice to the state and asking them to file their response, Justice N V Shravan Kumar while dictating the interim order said, "For the reasons alike and that prima facie the FIR lacks certain ingredients, in view of the reason that the reasons in the FIR emanates from contracts entered by the government wherein matter requires examination". The court however said that the investigation shall continue, adding that the petitioner shall cooperate with IO by furnishing all the documents.
Telangana High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Six Persons Accused Of Attacking District Collector
Pathlavath Gopal Naik vs. State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 205
The Telangana High Court granted anticipatory bail to six persons–including a woman, accused of carrying out an attack on a District Collector in Lagcherla Village last month allegedly during a public hearing regarding the setting up of the proposed Pharma company in the village.
It was alleged that when the District Collector and other officers reached the village, various persons including the petitioners and others formed into an unlawful assembly, stopped the vehicle of District Collector with slogans at Anjaneya Swamy Temple of the said village. When the District Collector and Special Officer came out of their vehicles, the aforesaid accused attacked on the Special Officer. Sensing the same, that they would definitely attack with stones, sticks and red chilly power, the complainant and other officers shifted the District Collector immediately in his vehicle. In the meantime, the accused persons damaged the other vehicle belongs to the District Collector.
Telangana High Court Quashes FIR Against Junior Civil Judges Accused Under SC/ST Act By Colleague
Kum. Asifa Sulthana vs. High Court Judicature at Hyderabad
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 206
The Telangana High Court has granted relief to two Junior Civil Judges in a long pending case of 10 years, wherein they were charged under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The allegation against the two judicial officers (petitioners) was that, during their time in the Judicial Academy, they had gotten into a tussle with their co-officers (R5 and other) and abused them using caste-based slurs.
X v/s Y
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 207
The Telangana High Court has underscored that courts must proceed with utmost caution in matters involving persons of unsound mind so that their rights are protected, adding that if a party to a suit alleges that the opposing party is of unsound mind held that the court must conduct a judicial inquiry to determine whether the allegation is true.
Justice K. Sujana while referring to Andhra Pradesh High Court's decision in Duvvuri Rami Reddi Vs Duvvudu Papi Reddy and others, which lays down certain principles to be followed while declaring a person of unsound mind, said:
“In matters involving persons of unsound mind, the Court must exercise utmost caution and diligence to ensure that the rights of such individuals are protected. Order XXXII, Rule 15 of C.P.C places persons of unsound mind or persons so adjudged in the same position as minors for purposes of Rules 1 to 14. When a party to a suit alleges that the opposing party is of unsound mind, the Court must conduct a judicial inquiry to determine whether the alleged person is indeed incapable of protecting his interests in the suit. This inquiry should consist of examining witnesses, the alleged lunatic, and seeking medical expert opinion.
Maaz Hassan Farooq Maaz vs. State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 208
The Telangana High Court has upheld the order of a Special Court wherein a discharged petition. filed by an accused who allegedly had ties to Lashkar-e-Taiba, and was planning a bombing during Dussehra was dismissed.
The accused had filed a criminal appeal against the order of the trial court, contending that the prosecution had failed to prove a prima facie charge and that everything stated by the prosecution, could not be taken as the gospel.
Dr. Mohan Babu vs. State of Telangana and another
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 209
The Telangana High Court on Monday (December 23) dismissed the anticipatory bail plea moved by veteran actor Mohan Babu in connection with the alleged attack on a TV9 journalist.
Justice K Lakshman in his order observed, "Respondent No.2 (complainant) received grievous injury and he underwent surgery. Prima facie, there are serious allegations against the petitioner. Investigation is pending. There is specific allegation against the petitioner (Babu) that he is trying to influence respondent No.2 with a request to withdraw the present complaint and, thus, he is interfering with the investigation in the subject crime".
Begari Ravi Kumar vs.State of TS
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 210
While acquitting a man who was convicted by the trial court for raping a minor girl after taking note of her, the Telangana High Court observed that the evidence of the child witness in the present case appeared to be tutored who could have been easily influenced by the elders in her family.
Justice K. Surender in his order said, "The evidence of a child witness can easily be influenced by the elders in the family. Acceptance of the child witness evidence would be dangerous in the present circumstances of the case as the evidence appears to be a result of tutoring. Not examining the 9 father and grandfather of the victim, who were sleeping by the side of the victim girl is fatal to the prosecution case".