Kaushik Reddy moves court seeking quashing of FIR
The MLA was booked in a case for allegedly making provocative statements near the Kamalapur Bus Stand on November 28, 2023, before the State Legislative Assembly elections
Hyderabad: BRS legislator Padi Kaushik Reddy has approached the Telangana High Court seeking the quashing of a criminal case filed against him for alleged violation of the Election Code during the 2023 State Legislative Assembly elections.
The MLA was booked in a case for allegedly making provocative statements near the Kamalapur Bus Stand on November 28, 2023, before the elections.
Also Read
Reddy is accused of saying, “Either ensure our win by voting us and participate in the celebrating procession or don’t vote us and participate in our funeral procession.” The statement was reportedly made during a campaign rally, and authorities allege it violated the election code. Reddy’s petition contends that the charges are baseless and that the chargesheet filed against him lacks sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations.
The case, which is currently pending before the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate for Excise Court at Nampally in Hyderabad, is expected to be heard next week in the Telangana High Court.
Bench disposes petitions filed by APTDC
A two-judge Bench of the Telangana High Court, led by Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J Sreenivas Rao, on Friday disposed of a batch of civil revision petitions filed by the Andhra Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Ltd (APTDC), setting aside the order of the Special Court for Commercial disputes at the City Civil Court, Hyderabad.
The dispute arose from an agreement signed on April 15, 2013, between APTDC and KPC Projects Limited for the construction of buildings. A disagreement over the terms led to the formation of an arbitral tribunal, which issued an award on December 3, 2022, directing APTDC to pay Rs 3.17 crore along with interest to KPC. KPC subsequently filed an execution petition in the Hyderabad City Civil Court, seeking enforcement of the award.
APTDC, however, objected, claiming the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the execution proceedings and sought an extension of time to comply with the award. The Executing Court rejected APTDC’s objections on December 18, 2024, prompting the corporation to approach the Telangana High Court.
The High Court Bench, after hearing both sides, found that the Executing Court had failed to address the issue of territorial jurisdiction properly. The court criticised the lower court for issuing a cryptic order without providing sufficient reasoning to justify its jurisdiction over the case.
Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order and directed the Executing Court to reconsider APTDC’s objections regarding territorial jurisdiction with a detailed, reasoned order in accordance with the law.
