Live
- 2 Narayanites bag gold medals in IJSO-2024
- Jail superintendent suspended in ailing farmer handcuff incident
- CM Revanth orders probe into farmer’s handcuff incident
- Handcuffing of farmer after heart stroke draws BRS’ ire
- Jagga Reddy questions unilateral decisions of AICC in-charges in TG
- Tribal women to get trained in multiple skills
- GHMC vet officials raid mutton, chicken shops
- Rising egg prices set to turn Xmas cakes dearer
- 3-member committee formed to solve RTC workers’ issues
- TG Planning Board V-C emphasises on ensuring food security
AP govt to submit report on 2nd postmortem of 6 victims
The two-judge bench of the High Court at Hyderabad hearing the case relating to the woodcutters encounter was informed by the Advocate General that the fresh report of second postmortem of 6 victims would be before the court on Thursday. The bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyothi Sengupta and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar took on file the first postmortem report submitted to it in a sealed cover.
The two-judge bench of the High Court at Hyderabad hearing the case relating to the woodcutters encounter was informed by the Advocate General that the fresh report of second postmortem of 6 victims would be before the court on Thursday. The bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyothi Sengupta and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar took on file the first postmortem report submitted to it in a sealed cover.
As reported earlier the report relates to the victims of the encounter in which 20 woodcutters were killed in Seshachalam Hill ranges near Tirupati on April 7. The bench perused the autopsy report of the forensic doctors at Ruia Hospital who conducted the autopsy of the 20 deceased persons.
The bench is hearing a writ plea filed by Chilaka Sudhakar, General Secretary Civil Liberties Committee and family members of 6 woodcutters seeking registration of a criminal case under Section 302 of IPC (Murder) against the police personnel involved in the encounter and for conduct of re-post-mortem of the bodies of the deceased. The bench perused the report and made clear that it would hear the matter after the remaining reports are placed before it.
