HC takes up honour killing case

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court will examine a plea seeking a reinvestigation into an alleged honour killing case while the trial is pending at IInd additional district and sessions judge, Nizamabad court. Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy directed the court to defer and reschedule the trial.

The judge was dealing with a writ petition filed by Mondi Suguna, mother of deceased, seeking reinvestigation into the criminal case booked for offences of abetment of suicide, under the SC/ST Atrocities Act against the accused persons Karka Ravi and others. The petitioner complained that the case of culpable homicide (murder) was falsely portrayed as death by suicide and sought an impartial, fair and effective investigation. Senior counsel V. Raghunath, appearing for the petitioner contended that the deceased belonged to the Mala community and that he was in love with a girl from the dominant caste community. He contended that the girl’s family murdered the deceased as the relationship could cause damage to their honour in society. He also brought to the notice of the court that the investigation had serious lacunae, with neither the evidence of the girl in relation nor the material evidences being taken on record for investigation. The police had not registered an offence of culpable homicide despite a group of persons from the girls’ community picking him up and forcibly making him consume pesticide. Stating the manner in which the investigation was done, senior counsel prayed for further investigation by the superintendent of police, Nizamabad. Government pleader for home Mahesh Raje argued that it was not a case of honour killing and that pesticide was purchased by the deceased himself for committing suicide. Raghunath pointed out that the owner of pesticide shop was not even made a witness in the chargesheet and said that this itself would establish a shady investigation. He also pointed out that the statement of the pesticide owner shop would reveal that the deceased used to regularly purchase pesticide in his shop. Further, he said that the deceased was involved in the agriculture activity and buying pesticide cannot be related or connected to suicide. Moreover, a statement which was not part of the chargesheet is relied upon by the police, Raghunath said. The judge wondered why the pesticide shop owner was not made a witness in the chargesheet and his statement not placed on record. On the request of the government pleader to verify the same, the judge deferred hearing of the case to July 18. Meanwhile, he directed the court to defer the proceedings for a period of two weeks which was supposed to commence on July 15.

HC fumes at Serilingampally GHMC officials

Justice T. Vinod Kumar of the Telangana High Court lamented the manner in which the GHMC officials are functioning at Serilingampally division. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Siri Constructions and Darshinee Infra Projects seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to restore the building permission granted earlier for construction of a buildings at Park Avenue, Rajarajeswari Colony, Kondapur. The petitioners contended that the High Court in an earlier round of litigation set aside the revocation notice but the respondent authorities, however, have not restored the permission granted in their online system to enable the petitioner to apply for issuance of occupancy certificate. The counsel for the petitioner contended that in spite of the order attaining finality in the absence of any further challenge thereto, the respondents authority failed to restore the same. The judge earlier observed that respondent authorities, without laying any challenge to the earlier order of High Court cannot justify their action of not restoring the permission by filing a counter-affidavit in the present writ petition and said prima facie it indicates that the respondent authorities intend to drag on the matter without any valid reason. Advocate-general A. Sudershan Reddy, appearing for GHMC, contended before the court that the state intends to file its counter in the present petition and sought to defer the matter. The judge faulted the state for their inaction in restoring the matter however posted the matter to July 30 for further adjudication.

HC allows appointment of arbitrator

Justice K. Lakshman of Telangana High Court allowed an arbitration application for appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes between parties pertaining to the development of land at Saidabad village, Hyderabad. The application was filed by Syeda Sana Sumera, alleging that the owners of the land failed to fulfil their obligations under registered agreement of Sale-cum-Irrevocable General Power of Attorney (AGPA) by failing to convey land to the applicant. The applicant further alleged that the respondents issued false notices, published misleading information, and filed baseless cases against the applicants, unnecessarily complicating matters that could have been resolved amicably. The applicant also complained that the respondents failed to adhere to the arbitration clause between them. On the other hand, respondents inter alia argued that the cheques issued by the applicant were defaulted and returned unpaid. The respondents also pointed out civil proceedings filed by them seeking cancellation of AGPA. The judge, after hearing the parties at length, observed that the disputes between the parties were arbitrable in nature and the existence of an arbitration agreement was not denied by the respondents. The judge ruled that the scope of High Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is extremely limited and that courts are bound to see prima facie existence of arbitration agreement. The judge further ruled that the court cannot go into disputed questions of facts in aforesaid circumstances and allowed the arbitration application.

Plea on Lal Darwaza Mahankali temple

Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging the inaction of the commissioner of endowment department against Simhavahini Mahankali Temple Trust. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by L. Govind Kumar, a devotee, who alleged that the commissioner failed to take any action against the temple trust or persons responsible for the mismanagement and the misappropriation of temple funds despite enquiry report submitted by the assistant commissioner of the said department. The petitioner further alleged that the members of the trust used temple funds to buy properties and registered them on third-party names. The judge directed the respondent authorities to look into the complaint and ensure that the funds including those which will be received during Bonalu, are not misused. The judge accordingly disposed of the writ plea.