Telangana High court hears batch of cases on Inam lands
Hyderabad: The full bench of Telangana High court comprising of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan, P. Naveen Rao and P. Sree Sudha on Wednesday inconclusively heard a batch of cases pertaining to transactions on Inam lands in which occupation rights certificates were not issued. The arguments were advanced by either side as to whether sale transactions can […]
Hyderabad: The full bench of Telangana High court comprising of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan, P. Naveen Rao and P. Sree Sudha on Wednesday inconclusively heard a batch of cases pertaining to transactions on Inam lands in which occupation rights certificates were not issued. The arguments were advanced by either side as to whether sale transactions can be allowed in Inam lands which do not have occupation rights certificates. Earlier a single judge of this court set aside the order passed by Joint Collector and Revenue Divisional Officer, Chevella division of Ranga Reddy district and also the occupancy rights certificate issued to other respondents. The single judge directed the Revenue divisional officer to consider the application of the writ petitioners to grant of occupancy rights certificates, being successor-in-interest. The panel will continue to hear the matter after two weeks.
Revanth Reddy asked to approach trial court
Justice K. Surender of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday directed A. Revanth Reddy to approach trial court with regard to relaxation of his bail condition. A. Revanth Reddy, Member of Parliament from Malkajgiri constituency approached the high court with a plea to release his passport which was deposited at the time of his bail in connection with the cash to note scam in 2015.
He was arrested along with two others when they were caught in a video footage, aired in the media, offering bribes to a nominated MLA, Elvis Stephenson, for his vote in the 2015 elections of the Telangana Legislative Council in favour of Telugu Desam Party. The then TDP MLA Revanth Reddy was arrested by the ACB with an allegation of offering Rs. 50 lakh and was sent to judicial custody. The High Court granted him bail with a condition to surrender his passport with the trail court. The petitioner’s counsel contended that on every event of his travelling abroad, he is approaching high court to release his passport and is depositing it after his return.
He argued that the above process was taking more than 20 days and it is getting difficult for him to get a visa in case of unexpected urgencies of travelling abroad. He further argued that the trial of the case is stayed by the Supreme Court and in such a case his passport being in custody of trial court was arbitrary. The counsel appearing for ACB stated that 25 witnesses have been examined and the petitioner cannot seek blanket order to release his passport. The court after hearing the contentions of both parties directed the petitioner to approach the trail court for release of his passport and file appropriate petition to relax the bail condition in his event of his travelling abroad before the trail court.
Bail cancellation arguments heard
The same judge on Wednesday adjourned the case of cancellation of bail of Pawan Malhan, Managing Director of Ebiz com Private Limited. Earlier the Enforcement Directorate lodged complaints against him alleging that his firm had cheated more than 17 lakh members across the country and siphoned more than Rs 5,000 crore through the Multi Level Marketing. In addition to three cases registered by the Cyberabad police Commissionerate in different police stations, Pawan Malhan has at least 14 cases against him in different parts of the country, including in other parts of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. In one of the cases at Cyberabad he was granted anticipatory bail by the high court imposing certain conditions one of them being that he should surrender within 15 days before the ED and shall be granted bail pursuant to his executing bail bonds.
The counsel for Enforcement Directorate who approached the high court to cancel the bail granted to him argued that respondent never surrendered before ED and has been filing applications with a plea to extend time to appear before it. She contended that even though the court on the earlier occasion directed him to appear within 10 days failing which the court directed the police can arrest him, he never appeared and none of the bail conditions are followed. Hence his bail has to be cancelled. The court while adjourning the matter directed the Enforcement Directorate to get further instructions.
