Telangana HC Bench ‘Anguished’ by Police Excesses Against Lawyers

 Hyderabad: The attack on a practicing advocate by the police that was reported in a newspaper was taken up as a writ petition by the Telangana High Court on Friday. The panel of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao voiced anguish at such increasing incidents of police highhandedness while dealing with lawyers. The panel took on file the case of P. Santosh, an advocate, who, it is alleged, was physically abused by the Borabanda police. The president of the Bar Association of Telangana High Court was before the court voicing concerns over the safety of the advocate. He contended that earlier an inquiry was ordered by the High Court into the alleged highhanded behaviour by the Borabanda police and pending inquiry another such incident by the Madannapet police has come to light. The additional advocate-general informed the court that all necessary steps will be taken in the matter in accordance with the law. He assured the court that nobody would be spared for taking the law into their hands. The panel urged the parties and those interested to submit written suggestions to ensure that there is no repetition of such incidents. All the steps as suggested will be in the form of directions, the panel said to multiple concerns raised in this regard. The panel required the government to come up with its response by October 16.

HC okays treatment for convict at pvt hospital

Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court granted short-term parole to a 65-year-old convict suffering from cognitive cardiac failure to receive treatment at a private hospital. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by the brother of P. Madhav Rao, convicted under the Anti-Corruption Act and serving a three-year sentence. The petitioner sought medical care for the convict at a private hospital in Somajiguda, instead of the government-run Gandhi Hospital, considering the deteriorating health of his brother. Counsel for the petitioner argued that the convict, who suffers from multiple organ issues, lower limb swelling, and an HMBAG-positive lung infection, was physically unfit to continue his sentence without specialised medical attention. Counsel also stated that the petitioner, being the brother of the convict, agreed to cover the cost of treatment at the private hospital. The government pleader referred to a report from a senior professor at Gandhi Hospital that the convict was being treated by the head of department of the hospital and there was no need to shift him. However, acknowledging the critical condition of the convict, the judge directed the superintendent of central prison, Chanchalguda, and the superintendent of Gandhi Hospital to transfer the convict to the private hospital for a two-week treatment.

Finalisation of paddy transport tenders stayed

Justice K. Sarath of the Telangana High Court stayed the finalisation of tenders issued for transportation of paddy and gunnies for the period from October 1, 2024, to September 30, 2025. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by the Lorry Owners and Welfare Association Society. The petitioner sought rejection of the bid filed by Bhainsa Logistic Service. It was the case of the petitioner that it was transporting paddy and gunnies for the last four years without adverse remarks. The petitioner said that it has 116 members, most of them owner-cum-drivers and transportation was the source of their livelihood. The petitioner alleged that the documents submitted by the unofficial respondent was contrary to the conditions stipulated in the tender, the same is ex-facie invalid and the bid ought to have been rejected at the technical bid stage itself. Counsel for the petitioner Srinivas Bobbili contended that as per the catena of judgment, the tender conditions should be construed strictly and the authorities are bound to reject the alleged invalid bid. He further argued that their arbitrary action has deprived the petitioner, whose bid is valid in all respects, of its legal and constitutional rights. The judge, considering the same, directed an interim stay to all further proceedings in pursuance of the tender and posted the matter for further adjudication.