High Court questions habeas corpus petition seeking child's custody
Hyderabad: A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court called upon a petitioner to explain how a habeas corpus petition was maintainable seeking child custody. The bench of Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Justice Pulla Karthik was hearing a writ filed by Asmaa Shareef Shahid complaining that her six-year-old child was in the illegal custody of her in-laws. Her husband is in jail in connection with a rape case and that in-laws were not allowing her to meet the child. Justice Shavili pointedly asked the petitioner to establish that the court can grant custody of a child in a habeas corpus petition.
Jubilee Hills police asked to probe trespass of property
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court directed Jubilee Hills police to investigate into a complaint lodged by Konda Raghurami Reddy, who complained about an alleged criminal trespass by the relatives of his daughter-in-law. The police were not investigating the case on the pretext that it was a matrimonial dispute. The petitioner insisted that it was a criminal trespass into his property and it needed to be investigated.
HC orders reinvestigation into alleged ‘murder’
Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy directed Vanasthalipuram police to re-investigate a complaint relating to alleged case of murder. The petitioner alleged that for inexplicable reasons the police had closed the complaint as one of suicide. According to the petitioner, his father died an unnatural death. The judge directed the police to re-investigate and submit a report.
Don’t throw out hawkers, HC tells Tupran civic body
Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N. Tukaramji on Monday directed municipal authorities of Tupran to consider the representation of Sri Kuragayala Market Union Association to continue as hawkers and street vendors. The bench was dealing with a complaint that the Medak municipality and the market authorities were forcing vendors to move from the area from where they were earning their livelihood. Counsel for the municipality pointed out that a new market facility has been provided to all hawkers. The appellant counsel pointed out that the decision to evict was contrary to the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act 2014. The judge directed the authorities to consider pending representations and status quo until further orders.
