Live
- Two Russian oil tankers with 29 on board damaged due to bad weather
- Telangana's Traditions Will Be Protected, Village by Village : BRS Leader MLC K. Kavitha
- Uganda to relocate 5,000 households from landslide-prone areas in eastern region
- Harish Rao Criticizes CM Revanth Reddy: "His Time is Over"
- Vijay Sethupathi Hails 'Vidudala-2' as a Theatrical Game-Changer
- Sahaj Yog: A Path to Inner Transformation and Harmony City takes giant strides
- Allu Arjun meets his uncle Nagababu at his residence
- J&K L-G felicitates Langar organisations & NGOs for contribution during Amarnath Yatra
- Hit by Covid, MP's Rakesh Mishra sees revival of his fortunes, courtesy PM SVANidhi scheme
- Trailblazing Yakshagana Artiste Leelavathi Baipaditthaya No More
Maoist encounter case: Hearing posted to Sept 15
The PIL bench of the High Court at Hyderabad comprising Acting Chief Justice Dilip B Bhosale and Justice SV Bhatt on Monday directed both the Telangana State government and the petitioner Civil Liberties committee to come prepared by next date of hearing whether the second FIR was required to be registered in the alleged encounter killings of Maoists Shruthi and Vidyasagar that took place at Mulug
The PIL bench of the High Court at Hyderabad comprising Acting Chief Justice Dilip B Bhosale and Justice SV Bhatt on Monday directed both the Telangana State government and the petitioner Civil Liberties committee to come prepared by next date of hearing whether the second FIR was required to be registered in the alleged encounter killings of Maoists Shruthi and Vidyasagar that took place at Mulug reserve forest area in Tadwai mandal of Warangal district on September 15 last year.
The petitioner sought directions to the government to entrust the probe to the CBI with regard to Tadwai encounter incident. Alleging that the police had killed the duo in a fake encounter, the counsel for the petitioner V Raghunath pointed out that the police had failed to register a case under IPC 302 based on a complaint given by mother of Shruthi.
Additional Advocate General J Ramachandra Rao submitted that there was no need to register a second FIR on the same incident and it is not permissible under law. Reacting to the submissions, the bench asked both the counsels to come prepared on the issue by next date of hearing and adjourned the matter by a week.
