Legal Briefs | Retired doctor wins case under Prevention of Corruption Act

HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court purged a civil assistant surgeon of charges of corruption. Dr M. Suresh Kumar, since retired, suffered a sentence and fine of Rs 10,000 handed by the principal special judge for SPE and ACB cases in Hyderabad. According to the prosecution, the complainant, a staff nurse, requested the appellant to provide the last pay certificate and service register. In spite of several reminders, the appellant did not hand over the service register of the accused to the Ursu Karimbad Maternity Hospital nor did they issue the last pay certificate. It was alleged that the doctor made a demand for Rs 10,000. Accordingly, a trap case was laid and the appellant was apprehended. According to the appellant, the complainant “did not hand over the charge after she was transferred. For the said reason, the question of issuing a last pay certificate or sending a service register does not arise. The reason for false implication is that the appellant had issued several memos to the complainant.” He also stated that “even on the date of trap, the spontaneous explanation given by the appellant was that though appellant refused, the complainant-PW1 had kept the amount in the table drawer and left hurriedly. He secured the said amount to return and placed it in an almirah in the bedroom. In the background of the issues that were in between PW1 and the appellant and coupled with the trap day events, it clearly goes to show that the appellant was falsely implicated”. On a detailed consideration of the appeal Justice K. Surrender said “All the circumstances as projected by the prosecution, which is backed by documentary evidence, are viewed collectively as the version given by the appellant is more probable. The explanation offered by the appellant, immediately during the post-trap proceedings, is proof enough to draw the conclusion of false implication.” He said strained relation between PW1 and the appellant cannot be lost sight of. The court cannot be selective while adjudicating and rely only on the demand and acceptance, while ignoring the other circumstances and background of the case. As already discussed, the charge was not handed over by PW1 and the circumstances of the case when considered as a whole, the accused had discharged his burden of proving his case convincingly.

No relief in Dalit Bandhu scheme

Justice S. Nanda of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea alleging non-disbursal of `9.9 lakh under the Telangana Dalit Bandhu Scheme (TDBS). The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Pulla Komala, who alleged that the authorities of the Scheduled Caste development department had failed to allocate and remit funds to the petitioner under the scheme even when the funds were available with them. The petitioner alleged that even though her name was listed as a beneficiary, the respondent authorities remitted funds only to select persons thereby discriminating against her. The petitioner sought a direction to the respondent authorities to consider her representation made in August for disbursal of the amount under the scheme. The assistant government pleader for social welfare submitted that the scheme has been halted and specific directions were issued in April by the VC and MD of Telangana Scheduled Castes Cooperative Development Corporation Ltd not to implement the scheme until further orders. After hearing both the parties, the court refused to grant any interim relief and posted the matter for further adjudication.

Karimnagar civic chief summoned

Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court summoned the commissioner of Karimnagar Municipal Corporation to explain the delay of over eight years in disposing an application under the Building Regularisation Scheme (BRS). The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by Sardar Shailender Singh. The government introduced BRS in 2015 permitting regularisation of unauthorised construction. The petitioner alleged that the officers of the corporation did not take action against Rajender Singh for construction of two cellars, ground floor and six upper floors without proper building permission. On the other hand, Singh submitted that he had obtained building permission for the construction of the ground floor and two upper floors in 2005, and thereafter, having made further construction of six floors, had applied for regularisation in January 2016. He contended that the application was still pending consideration on the file of the commissioner for almost eight years. Appalled by the delay caused in disposing of the application, the court ordered the commissioner to appear in person and submit an explanation to justify the delay on the next date of hearing and posted the matter for further adjudication.

Remove govt land encroachment: HC

Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court ordered demolition of illegal encroachments made by CPI/CPM around the tank beds of Sriramsagar Project (SRSP) canal, Warangal. The judge enhanced the time allotted earlier to carry out the removal of encroachments by two weeks. The judge was dealing with a contempt plea filed by several agriculturists from Paidipally. It was the case of the petitioners that they are farmers and residents of the village that is in Warangal mandal and eking out their livelihood by doing cultivation. It is the further case of the petitioners that their land holdings were acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for construction of Kakatiya main canal under SRSP and the advance possession of their land was taken in 1983. Meagre compensation was paid to them. The petitioners contended that after the excavation of the canal from the petitioners land, there was a lot of unutilised land which belongs to the petitioners and such land parcels were in continuous possession and cultivation of the petitioners even as on today. The grievance of the petitioners is that while they are conducting agricultural operations, certain political parties threatened them of raising huts in their land, which constrained them to make a number of representations requesting action against the illegal encroachers. They have also sought police protection to remove the temporary huts but so far no action has been taken thereon. The judge, while allowing the writ petition, ordered the respondent authorities to extend police protection to the irrigation department to remove all the temporary huts on government land within three months. However, the police authorities did not extend protection to the irrigation department upon allegedly being engaged in election services of the district, and hence the illegal encroachments could not be demolished. The court, upon hearing the contempt case, directed the removal of all the illegal encroachments made by the political parties over the government owner tank beds finally within two weeks.