Telangana HC: Multiple FIRs for Derogatory Comments on Religion

Hyderabad: Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court took on file a writ plea challenging multiple registrations of FIRs against Kadire Krishna, an advocate, for allegedly making controversial and derogatory comments about Enkanna Swamy, a revered Hindu deity, and Venkatesa Suprabhatam. The judge was dealing with a writ plea filed by him alleging that multiple FIRs are registered across the state against him for allegedly criticising Venkatesa Suprabhatam. Senior counsel V. Raghunath, representing the petitioner, argued that his client being an advocate was quite aware of the laws. He contended that the video circulating in the media is only of 1:04 minutes while the complete video is more than an hour. He argued that fuming without watching the entire video was incorrect and uncalled for. Senior counsel also pointed out that the petitioner had filed a quash petition and obtained orders restraining coercive steps against him. The petitioner prayed to the court to grant him police aid because of public aggression against him. The judge, refusing to grant police aid, said that without any prayer for such a relief no order can be granted. The judge accordingly directed the government pleader to seek instructions and posted the matter to August 12.

HC imposes costs for false complaint

Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court imposed costs of Rs 1,000 to be paid to Telangana Sub-registrars Association in a writ plea complaining falsely of non-registration of document. The judge was dealing with the writ plea filed by K. Aruna Bhai. The petitioner complained that the Makhtal sub-registrar refused to receive documents with regard to sale of plots at Makthal village, Narayanpet district. The court earlier summoned the official, who informed the court in person that the petitioner had not approached him and added that if a petitioner presented documents the same would be examined as per the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act and Registration Act. In a brief order, Justice Shravan Kumar said “In my considered view, the aforesaid submission of the assistant government pleader is well-founded. Admittedly, the petitioner did not produce a draft copy of the document that is sought for registration. Therefore, it is difficult for this court to accept the statement of the petitioner that he had approached the respondent authority, more so, when that statement is specifically denied by the respondent.” When the petitioner sought liberty to withdraw the writ petition, the judge granted such liberty and made it clear that if the petitioner in respect of the subject property submitted the document before the registering authority, the same would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed in accordance with law. He also made it clear that it is up to the registering authority to register of refuse the document sought to be presented by the petitioner, by duly assigning reasons in support of such decision and communicating the said decision to the petitioner.

Union office-bearer’s transfer challenged in HC

The transfer of an office-bearer of a union, contrary to transfer guidelines of the government, came up for challenge before the Telangana High Court. Justice Pulla Karthik took on file a writ plea challenging the transfer of a multi-purpose health worker (MPHW)(F) from Medipally PHC, Jagtial. The judge was hearing a writ plea filed by Endabetla Padmalatha, who complained that the director of public health and family welfare, the Jagtial district medical and health officer and other authorities illegally transferred the petitioner from the Medipally PHC to the government general hospital, Jagtial district, in contravention of the circulars and GOs. The petitioner alleged that the respondent authorities had failed to consider her request for retaining her at the same place as she was in the position of an office-bearer as the district general secretary of Public Health and Medical Employees Union, Jagtial. The judge directed the government pleader to get instructions from the respondent authorities and posted the matter for further adjudication.