Live
- ‘Asli’ Sonakshi shares a glimpse of herself in ‘golden hour’
- Shraddha Kapoor took ‘thepla’ for her ‘foreign’ trip
- ChatGPT Now Supports Video Inputs: All Details
- B.Com vs BBA: Which degree better prepares you for an MBA?
- Apple Intelligence now features Image Playground, Genmoji
- National Energy Conservation Day: Fostering a sustainable future
- RG Kar issue: Day-long protests in Kolkata today on bail to Ghosh, Mondal
- Plans afoot to bring EPFO service at par with banking: LabourSecy
- vivo unveils X200 series of mobiles
- Sensex, Nifty stage a surprise recovery
Stay on arrest of accused set aside
The High Court at Hyderabad, while asserting that it has the power under Article 226 to stay arrest of the accused in special circumstances, has ruled the reasons for giving such a direction must be recorded by the judges in their orders.
Hyderabad: The High Court at Hyderabad, while asserting that it has the power under Article 226 to stay arrest of the accused in special circumstances, has ruled the reasons for giving such a direction must be recorded by the judges in their orders.
The division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice Shameem Akhter gave this ruling on Wednesday while setting aside the order of a single judge granting stay of arrest of an accused, while directing completion of investigation by the police.
The police had registered cheating case under Section 420, 406, 506 of IPC against a woman, called Chandana from Nagole, on the basis of a complaint by Swarnalatha. Chandana had approached the High Court and the single judge granted relief to her by staying her arrest.
Aggrieved by this decision Swarnalatha filed a writ appeal against that order.
The counsel for Chandana informed the bench that his client was cooperating with the police in the investigation and there was no need for arresting her.
The counsel for the appellant contended that it was for the police to decide whether the arrest needed to be made or not.
After hearing arguments, the division bench set aside the order of the single judge and made it clear that the police must take necessary steps to complete the investigation as per Section 41A of CrPC.
Whether to arrest a person or not was the discretion to be exercised by the police depending on the investigation. The Courts directions on this issue would amount to interference in the work of the police, the bench observed.
HC allows auction of Keshava Reddy’ land Suspecting the real intention behind moving the writ petition, the High Court at Hyderabad on Wednesday refused to stay the auction of the property belonging to Nagireddy Keshava Reddy, chairman of Keshava Reddy Educational Institutions, located at Kondapur area of the city by State Bank of India scheduled on on Wednesday.
With the grilling by the division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ramesh Ranganathan and Justice Shameem Akhter, the petitioner Daddanala Venkatranga Reddy sought permission to withdraw the petition.
He had moved the High Court claiming that Keshava Reddy had entered into an agreement with him for sale of his 1.14 acres of land at Kondapur in Hyderabad before his arrest. It may be recalled that Keshava Reddy was arrested by the Kurnool police for allegedly collecting a sum of Rs 570 crore as deposits from parents of his students and not returning them.
The petitioner alleged that Keshava Reddy had pledged the same Kondapur property with SBI and obtained loan without revealing the agreement of sale made with him.
The lower civil court granted a decree in his favour when he approached it seeking protection of his right. But the SBI disregarding the decree is going ahead with the e-auction of the said property under the Securitisation Act.
Suspecting some foul play behind the plea, the bench refused to stay the auction and made its intention clear to dismiss the plea. The counsel for the petitioner, however, urged the bench to grant permission to withdraw the petition and the bench allowed for withdrawal of the petition.
