Hyderabad: Justice K. Sarath of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to senior revenue officials in a contempt case alleging violation of court orders protecting peaceful possession of private property. The judge was dealing with a contempt case filed by Khaja Layeeq Ur Rahman and Safdar Mirza. The petitioners complained of non-compliance with directions issued by the High Court in an earlier writ plea, by which the revenue authorities were restrained from interfering with the possession of the petitioners except by following due process of law. The petitioners alleged that despite a subsisting interim status quo order passed in March 2020 and a final order in February 2025, restraining interference with their land at Banjara Hills, Road No. 2, Shaikpet mandal, Hyderabad, the authorities violated the court’s directions. It was contended that revenue officials, accompanied by police personnel, entered the property, stopped repair works, removed boundary material and threatened eviction without issuing any statutory notice. The petitioners alleged that the second petitioner, a practising advocate, was manhandled when he objected to the interference and that threats were issued of foisting false cases if the land was not vacated. Justice Sarath ordered notice to Navin Mittal, principal secretary, revenue, and other authorities.
Not Via Email, Say Unipole Advertisers
Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging municipal directions regulating unipole and hoarding display boards. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by the Outdoor Advertising Media Association questioning the legality of the directions issued by municipal authorities through emails. Counsel for the petitioner contended that restrictions affecting the right to trade under Article 19(1)(g) must originate from valid legislation and not from executive communications. It was argued that repeated demands for structural stability certificates, daily inspections, and re-inspection fees had no statutory backing and emanate solely from emails. The petitioner contended that such directions hindered lawful business operations including installation of flexis on unipoles and execution of advertisement contracts. The judge recorded the submissions and deferred the matter for further hearing.
HC Defers Hearing in Poll Petition Against KTR
Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao of the Telangana High Court deferred hearing of an election petition questioning the election of Sircilla MLA K.T. Rama Rao, BRS working president, who allegedly suppressed material facts in the nomination affidavit. Lagishetti Srinivas contended that the respondent did not disclose details of land allegedly owned by his son in Form-26, which, according to the petitioner, amounted to undue influence and a corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act. Counsel for the petitioner argued that non-disclosure of dependent-related information was a material omission that vitiated the election and constituted suppression of facts essential for voters’ informed decision-making. It was submitted that the omission created an unfair electoral advantage. Opposing the plea, the respondents contended that there is no statutory obligation to disclose the particulars cited by the petitioner and that the son could not be presumed to be a dependent unless specifically pleaded and proved to have no independent income. It was argued that to test whether any non-compliance with Form-26 or the Act occurred, the judge must examine the provisions under the Representation of the People Act pertaining to grounds for declaring election void and corrupt practices read with the Supreme Court’s ‘Lok Prahari’ ruling. The respondents contended that no ingredients of corrupt practice or undue influence were satisfied, and that the petition failed to plead how the alleged omission materially affected the election result, which is a mandatory requirement for setting aside an election. The respondents contended that the petition sought to import requirements not contemplated by Form-26 and that the alleged non-disclosure could not itself constitute undue influence.
Man in Assault Case Gets Bail
The Telangana High Court granted bail to a man accused of outraging the modesty of, and attempting sexual assault on, his former wife. The judge was dealing with a criminal petition filed by the accused seeking release on bail in a case registered by the Rajendranagar police of Cyberabad. According to the prosecution, the complainant, the former wife of the petitioner, alleged that despite dissolution of marriage, the petitioner visited her parental home and subjected her to acts amounting to sexual assault. Based on her complaint lodged in April, the police registered a case initially invoking offences relating to sexual assault and criminal force, which were later altered after recording the victim’s statement. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the complaint was a retaliatory measure following issuance of a legal notice seeking access to the two minor children of the couple, who are in the custody of the complainant. It was argued that the petitioner was falsely implicated, that he has been in judicial custody since October 30 and that the substantial part of the investigation stood completed. After examining the material on record, the judge noted that the petitioner remained in custody for over six weeks and that several prosecution witnesses, including the investigating officer, were examined and the statement of the victim was recorded. Taking into account the stage of investigation and the period of incarceration, the judge held that continued detention was not warranted and enlarged the petitioner on conditional bail.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: deccanchronicle.com
