Copyright deccanchronicle
Hyderabad: A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court, comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin, accepted a public interest litigation seeking protection of forest land and prevention of alleged illegal felling of trees in Kushnepally of Bejjur mandal, Kumram Bheem Asifabad district. The panel was hearing a PIL filed by K. Buchi Ram Reddy, a retired forest officer. The petitioner alleged negligence and failure on the part of the forest department and other authorities in safeguarding forest areas and fulfilling their constitutional duty to protect the environment. The petitioner claimed that certain private individuals were attempting to fell mature teak and other trees spread over about 38 acres by wrongfully asserting ownership of forest land. Counsel for the petitioner contended that the land forms part of the Gudem reserved forest within the Bejjur range and Kagaznagar division and that the vendors’ ownership claims were dubious. In response, counsel for the private respondents argued that joint survey reports of 2005 by the forest, revenue and survey departments had confirmed the land as patta land outside the reserve forest boundary, a finding upheld by a single judge in earlier proceedings. After hearing the submissions, the panel directed the state government and forest authorities to file their response detailing measures taken to prevent illegal tree felling and protect forest land.Contempt case against Nimmagadda dismissedJustice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court on Friday dismissed a contempt case against industrialist Nimmagadda Prasad and others. The contempt case was filed by Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority (Rakia). According to the petitioner, it had a foreign decree at its instance in a court at Ras Al Khaimah, United Arab Emirates, to the tune of over Rs 400 crore against Prasad.Pending execution, it is alleged that IQuest, the company of the judgment debtor, was seeking to purchase Viatris Inc. and both companies were alter egos of the judgment debtor. It was stated that the purchase would affect the liquidity of the company owned by the judgment debtor. The commercial court rejected an application for advancement filed by the decree holder. In the present contempt, it was stated that contrary to the statement made before the commercial court, the company was taken over by another company (Tianish Laboratories Private Limited), which was also an alter ego of the judgment debtor. The contempt case was dismissed on the merits, leaving it open to the decree holder to work out remedies in accordance with the law. HC seeks police reply in TV5 CEO caseJustice Tirumala Devi of the Telangana High Court on Friday ordered notice to the police to respond in a quash proceedings by the CEO of a TV channel. The quash petition was an offshoot of the matrimonial dispute between film actor Dharma Satya Sai Srinivas Mahesh Kakani and his wife Gauthamy. The film actor filed a complaint against Murthy, the CEO of TV5, alleging extortion and violation of Section 72 of the Information Technology Act. It was the case of the petitioner that the wife of the complainant had revealed in a “No Holds Barred” talk show about the matrimonial excesses of the complainant and that there was an ongoing matrimonial dispute between the actor and his wife. Against this background, the present complaint was lodged, alleging, inter alia, that the petitioner demanded a sum of `10 crore to resolve the matrimonial dispute. It was also alleged in the complaint that the petitioner had stated various personal details of the complainant, which the petitioner would have only if he tapped the phone of the complainant. Counsel for the petitioner E.V. Sidhaarth would argue that a bare reading of the FIR would show that no prima facie case was made out. It was also argued that the complainant had filed an earlier writ petition that was closed, directing him to cooperate with the ongoing investigations. Sidhaarth also argued that the complainant, instead of cooperating with the investigation, had logged the present complaint as a counterblast. Justice Tirumala Devi directed the police to issue notice under Section 35b of BNSS and posted the criminal case after notice was served on the complainant.HC grants bail to doctor in trafficking caseHigh Court granted bail to a doctor accused of purchasing a kidnapped five-year-old boy from alleged traffickers. The judge was hearing a criminal petition filed by Dr Rizwana Begum, who sought to be enlarged on bail in connection with a case registered at Chandanagar police station, Cyberabad. The petitioner, a resident of Siddipet, was arrayed as accused No. 3 in the case, in which the police alleged that the child was kidnapped by a person and then sold through another intermediary to the petitioner. After hearing both sides and noting that the petitioner had been in custody since September and that several witnesses were examined, the judge observed that...
