State told to submit report on child trafficking

By Author  |   Legal Correspondent  |  Published: 25th Jun 2019  1:01 am

Hyderabad: A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court, comprising Acting Chief Justice Raghavendra Singh Chauhan and Justice Shameem Akhter, on Monday continued to hear a suo moto PIL based on a newspaper article. The article dealt with child trafficking and sexual exploitation at Yadadiri town and other parts of Telangana and also with unlawful administration of hormones to children. Earlier, the bench directed the government to submit records relating to child abuse trafficking and sexual exploitation. Special Government Pleader representing State could not provide the details of the transfer of 36 victims from private protection homes to child welfare homes. Foster parents of the victim children submitted that a tussle between child welfare homes in Nalgonda and Warangal was affecting the rehabilitation of children. The bench directed the State to submit the said reports and adjourned the matter.

Exhibition society case posted to July 12

The same bench directed the Nampally Exhibition Society and the Telangana government to file counters relating to the issue of fire safety. Khaja Aijazuddin, an advocate from Hyderabad, had filed a PIL questioning the lack of fire safety at the Nampally Exhibition Grounds. He sought action against the exhibition society for not complying with fire safety measures and for not obtaining the fire no-objection certificate as mandated under the Telangana Fire Services Act. The court posted the matter to July 12.

Plea against police

Justice A Rajasheker Reddy of the Telangana High Court heard a batch of writ petitions filed by A Shiva Shanker and others against the police for not registering their complaints. The counsel representing the state submitted that as per the earlier orders of the court, the petitioners cannot approach the court under writ jurisdiction as they have an alternative remedy to approach the Magistrate or Superintendent of Police. The petitioners submitted that there could not be a blanket order on this as the context of the complaint differs from case to case. One of the counsels for the petitioners, T Rahul, pointed out that in matters of cognisable offence the police were selectively registering cases. This amounts to unequal treatment of the complainants under Article 14 of the Constitution. The petitioners contended that the writ jurisdiction and remedy of approaching the Magistrate were two independent remedies. The judge adjourned the matter to Tuesday for further hearing.