Justice NV Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court on Thursday directed the police to follow due procedure before taking any action against Adepu Bhasker, a rice mill proprietor from Hanamkonda. Bhasker, a senior citizen, alleged harassment after a constable from Parvathagiri police station phoned him on August 14, asking him to appear before the SHO despite no FIR being registered.
He claimed such actions damaged his reputation and sought relief through a writ petition. The Sub-Inspector of Parvathagiri, represented by the Assistant Government Pleader for Home, told the court that no complaint had been filed against Bhasker and hence there was no basis for summoning him.
The state assured the court that if any complaint arose in future, police would act strictly in line with the law. Recording these submissions, the court disposed of the petition with directions to ensure compliance with due process in any future proceedings.
HC directs closure of rowdy sheet against petitioner
Justice N Tukaramji of the Telangana High Court ordered the closure of a rowdy sheet against Edulakanti Naresh Goud Lachi, ruling that no criminal case is pending against him.
Naresh argued that continuing Rowdy Sheet No.2 of 2013 and displaying his photographs at Ibrahimpatnam police station without notice was illegal and damaged his reputation.
His counsel said the sheet was opened on the basis of two criminal cases, which were later settled in the Lok Adalat. The state submitted that six cases had once been registered against him, but these ended in quashings, acquittals, false reports or settlements.
On August 15, 2025, the Ibrahimpatnam SHO recommended closure of the rowdy sheet, which was still under consideration. Accepting the submissions, Justice Tukaramji directed the Rachakonda Police Commissioner to act on the SHO’s recommendation and close the rowdy sheet without delay.
Info panel notice on RTI activist’s plea suspended
The Telangana High Court on Thursday set aside a notice issued by the State Information Commission in relation to 403 second appeals filed by RTI activist Vaddam Shyam.
Shyam had moved the high court after the Commission, on September 18, 2025, issued notices that did not mention individual case numbers and sought to hear all matters on the same day. He argued that the process violated procedure.
Justice T Madhavi Devi, hearing the lunch motion petition at 3 pm, agreed with the contention and suspended the notice. The court observed that the Commission had erred in its handling of the appeals and directed it to issue fresh notices in proper form, clearly specifying the case numbers, before proceeding further.