Hyderabad: Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court quashed criminal proceedings against Vaddiraju Ravichandra, BRS Rajya Sabha member, accused of violating election-related norms during a rally held in 2018. The complainant alleged that Ravichandra was involved in offences under section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 30 of the Police Act for taking out a rally without prior permission in clear violation of the model code of conduct that was in force. The petitioner said the Warangal rally had over 500 participants and this had allegedly disrupted public order. Following a complaint filed by a government official, an FIR was registered, and the chargesheet was filed after an investigation. The judge analysed the case in light of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, and relevant legal precedents. It was observed that Section 188 of the IPC pertained to disobedience of an order promulgated by a public servant, which required specific procedural compliance under Section 195(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The judge noted that the chargesheet in this case was filed by a police officer, who lacked the authority to initiate such proceedings without authorisation. Further, regarding the allegations under Section 30 of the Police Act, the judge clarified that this provision only empowered the police to regulate processions and meetings but did not create an offence for holding a rally without permission. Consequently, the judge found that the allegations against the petitioner failed to meet the legal standards required to sustain the charges. Relying on established judicial precedents, including ‘State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal’ and ‘Skoda Auto Volkswagen India Private Limited v. State of Uttar Pradesh’, the judge reiterated that the power to quash proceedings under Section 482 of the CrPC should be exercised sparingly and only in cases where the allegations, even if taken at face value, do not constitute a cognizable offence. The judge concluded that the contents of the charge sheet and the statements of witnesses lacked the necessary ingredients to establish offences under both Section 188 of the IPC and Section 30 of the Police Act. The judge thus held that continuing the proceedings would be unwarranted, and the case against the petitioner was quashed.
HC grants bail in Rs 300 cr. misappropriation case
Justice K. Sujana of the Telangana High Court granted bail to an accused in a financial fraud case involving the alleged misappropriation of over Rs 300 crore by 12 Wealth Capital Services. The judge was dealing with a bail petition filed by Boddulu Harikrishna, head of a department in the company. The petitioner was facing allegations of orchestrating fraudulent investment schemes such as “Buy back open plots scheme” and “Double gold scheme.” These schemes promised high returns and incentives, including gold biscuits worth Rs five lakh. Ultimately around 3,600 customers were defrauded. The judge heard arguments from both sides, with the petitioner contending the innocence of the accused and claiming his false implication due to prior disputes. Counsel for the petitioner also highlighted the completion of the material part of the investigation and the cooperation extended by the accused, who has been in judicial custody since November 15. In opposition, the additional public prosecutor emphasised the seriousness of the allegations and involvement of large sums of money, urging the judge to dismiss the bail petition. After considering the evidence and submissions, the judge deemed it fit to grant bail, imposing conditions to ensure compliance with the investigation process. The judge clarified that this decision does not affect ongoing investigations and encouraged full cooperation from the petitioner.
Notice to PS (education) and TGPSC chief in contempt case
Justice T. Madhavi Devi of the Telangana High Court ordered notice to the principal secretary (education), chairman of the Telangana Public Service Commission and the chairman of Telangana Residential Educational Institutions Societies in a contempt case pertaining to rejection of candidature to the post of principal. The judge was dealing with a contempt case filed by Indoori Ashok Kumar, alleging willful disobedience and violation of orders passed by the judge in a writ plea earlier. The petitioner had challenged the actions of the respondent authorities in not considering his first experience certificate as a headmaster of Neo-Kids High School for appointment as a principal in residential institutions. The judge had directed the respondent authorities to consider the experience certificate of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within three months. The petitioner alleged that despite directions, the respondent had failed to comply.
HC junks claim for attender’s post
A two-judge panel of the Telangana High Court, comprising Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice G. Radha Rani, dismissed a writ plea challenging the non-appointment of a candidate for the BC-A Women’s category vacancy in the post of attender for judicial services. The panel was dealing with a writ plea filed by O. Sujatha, who contended that she was a qualified candidate, yet the respondents had not appointed her to the vacancy. In response, the panel emphasised that the mere existence of a vacancy does not entitle one to an appointment. The panel asked the petitioner to point out errors in the selection process and questioned whether a writ of mandamus could be invoked to demand appointment when the petitioner had not been selected. The panel clarified that mandamus could only be invoked after a selection had been made, not in cases where the petitioner had not been chosen and was just eligible. The panel concluded that the petitioner had no statutory right to be appointed and dismissed the writ plea.
