Hyderabad: Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday directed the Sessions Court in Adilabad to conduct trial afresh in the alleged fake encounter of Azad alias Cherukuri Raj Kumar, CPI (Maoist) member of Central Committee and Politburo and Hemachandra Pandey in 2010, a journalist who worked for several Hindi language newspapers. Aggrieved […]
Hyderabad: Justice K Lakshman of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday directed the Sessions Court in Adilabad to conduct trial afresh in the alleged fake encounter of Azad alias Cherukuri Raj Kumar, CPI (Maoist) member of Central Committee and Politburo and Hemachandra Pandey in 2010, a journalist who worked for several Hindi language newspapers. Aggrieved by the order of Adilabad Sessions Court Judge the police personnel involved in the encounter filed this case.
Considering the contentions in the protest petition by the victim’s wife Babitha Pandey, the Sessions Judge directed continuation of investigation and proceedings against the police officers. The counsel for police petitioners contended that the Sessions Court had ordered to take cognizance against all the police officers who participated in the encounter without giving opportunity of hearing to the police.
Counsel representing respondents said that the journalist was picked up in Nagpur, lifted in helicopter to Andhra Pradesh before being murdered in a fake encounter. The postmortem reports suggest that firing is done from a short range of 2 to 3 feet he said discrediting the version of police that firing was from a hilltop position. Self-defense theory was taken up by police in a fake encounter he argued. The panel after hearing the both sides at length, directed the trail court to conduct trial afresh after hearing both the parties within a period of three months.
On Nirmal OU PG college shifting
A two-judge Panel of the Telangana High Court comprising Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Surepalli Nanda on Wednesday heard a PIL challenging the action of Osmania University in stalling admissions and operations of University PG college, Nirmal. The panel was dealing with a PIL filed by Anumula Bhaskar. The petitioner pointed out that a lot of poor students and students from marginalized sections of the society in and around the region were pursuing their higher education from the institution since 1991. The decision of university in shifting the PG campus to main campus would affect the very Fundamental Right to Education of large section of students, he contended.
The counsel appearing for the authorities pointed out that only few students took admission in the University PG Colleges from past few years and as such if campus was not shifted it would be a burden on state funds. The counsel stated that all the courses and subjects which were taught will be continued in the main campus. The panel expressed the view that it was the decision of university to shift the campus or not, considering the circumstances as to number of students getting admitted every year and other parameters. “If University expresses the view to revive the operation of PG Centre taking into consideration the number of students getting admitted from next year it would be beneficial to students”, the panel said. The panel adjourned the matter to August 26 for further hearing.