Andhra Pradesh High Court Judgments & News

Andhra Pradesh High Court

Andhra Pradesh High Court Flags Mechanical Issuance of LOCs in 498A Cases

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has cautioned police authorities against routinely issuing Look Out Circulars (LOCs) in matrimonial cruelty cases under Section 498A IPC.

Justice K. Sreenivasa Reddy observed that LOCs, which restrict a person’s right to travel abroad, should be issued only in grave offences affecting national interest, financial integrity, or society at large.

Mechanical issuance without assessing cooperation or flight risk violates Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court quashed an LOC against a Dubai-based technician booked under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, noting that he was cooperating with the investigation.

It held that unjustified travel restrictions can cause irreparable professional and personal harm.

[A v. The UOI & Anr.]

Read Details / 8 days ago

MananBookmark

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals in Actress Prathyusha Death Case, Upholds Abetment Conviction

The Supreme Court of India has dismissed appeals in the 23-year-old death case of Telugu/Tamil actress Prathyusha, ruling out allegations of murder and rape.

A Bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan held that consistent eyewitness accounts and medical evidence established death by poisoning. The Court noted that Prathyusha and her boyfriend, Gudipalli Siddhartha Reddy, had consumed poison amid opposition to their relationship, though Reddy survived.

Rejecting the defence of accidental intake, the Court found Reddy guilty of abetment to suicide for procuring the poison and directed him to surrender within four weeks.

It also termed the postmortem conducted by Dr. Muni Swamy unprofessional.

[Gudipalli Siddharta Reddy v. State (C.B.I.)]

Read Details / 9 days ago

VishwaBookmark

AP High Court Declines Compensation to Occupants of Government Land

The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed compensation claims raised by persons occupying government land, holding that continuous possession, even extending over several decades or more than a hundred years, does not convert an illegal encroachment into a lawful right.

The case arose from petitions filed by residents of Gunadala, Vijayawada, whose structures were impacted by the construction of a railway overbridge and who sought compensation by asserting long-standing occupation.

The Court held that without title, patta, or regularisation, such occupants cannot be treated as landowners under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and are therefore not entitled to compensation.

Read Details / 18 days ago

Thanush SBookmark

Andhra Pradesh High Court Restricts Monopoly Over APSRTC Commercial Spaces

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that public resources cannot be concentrated in the hands of a single individual and such monopolisation is contrary to public interest.

The case arose from writ petitions filed by a licensee challenging the cancellation of his licences and the issuance of a new tender for commercial spaces at a bus stand.

The Court found that APSRTC had improperly allotted multiple open spaces to one person, allowing illegal sub-leasing for profit while failing to pay licence fees. It noted violations of tender conditions and suppression of material facts.

The Court directed APSRTC to implement a “One Person–One Open Space” policy for future tenders and upheld the cancellation of licences.

Read Details / 26 days ago

Thanush SBookmark

Order Not Invalid if Legal Reasoning is Sound Despite Fake AI Citations: AP High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that a judicial order is not invalid merely because it relies on non-existent citations generated by artificial intelligence, if the legal principles applied are correct.

The Court examined a challenge to a Trial Court order that had upheld an Advocate Commissioner’s report in a property dispute.

Although the Trial Court had referred to case laws that were later found to be fake and AI-generated, the High Court said the substantive legal reasoning was in line with settled law. The Court observed that the incorrect citations did not vitiate the order.

It also cautioned courts against unverified use of AI, stating that actual intelligence should be preferred over artificial intelligence.

Read Details / a month ago

Thanush SBookmark

Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds NGT Order Keeping Mining Clearance in Abeyance

The Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld a National Green Tribunal order keeping a mining company’s environmental clearance in abeyance and stressed that natural resources must be preserved for future generations.

The Court said protecting forests and the environment is a duty of both the State and citizens, and polluting industries cannot operate unchecked.

It observed that environmental protection and sustainable development must be balanced and applied together.

The Court found no jurisdictional error in the NGT’s decision, holding that the tribunal rightly intervened due to procedural lapses and inadequate environmental assessment in granting clearance to the silica sand mining project.

Read Details / a month ago

MahiraBookmark

Andhra Pradesh High Court Asks State to Consider Alternative Jobs for Medically Retired RTC Staff

The Andhra Pradesh High Court directed the State government to consider representations of APSRTC employees retired on medical grounds for alternative employment or enhanced compensation.

The Court held that forced retirement without offering alternative jobs or adequate compensation may violate the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.

Noting that hundreds of such claims remain pending after APSRTC’s merger with the State, the Court recorded the government’s decision to revive monetary compensation through a Government Order.

It directed the authorities to decide the employees’ representations within eight weeks and release compensation within three months thereafter.

[RTC Employees v. State of Andhra Pradesh]

Read Details / a month ago

MahiraBookmark

‘State Is Like a Parent’: Andhra Pradesh High Court Warns Against Impulsive Defamation Cases

The Andhra Pradesh High Court quashed criminal defamation proceedings against a local media house, observing that the State must act with “patience and maturity” when faced with criticism.

Drawing a parental analogy, the Court observed that governments cannot claim defamation unless specific officials or departments are targeted with false and malicious imputations.

Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao emphasised that fair reporting done in good faith is protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

He cautioned that impulsive criminal prosecutions by the State against the media risk creating a chilling effect on free speech and undermine democratic values.

Read Details / a month ago

MananBookmark

Hundi Collections Involve Devotees’ Faith, Not Just Accounting: Andhra Pradesh High Court Flags Lapses At TTD

The Andhra Pradesh High Court examined serious lapses in the management of hundi collections at the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) following a theft reported at the Parakamani Complex in April 2023.

The Court said the issue goes beyond accounting and directly affects the religious faith of devotees. It observed that outdated and manpower-heavy procedures make the system vulnerable to pilferage and misappropriation.

Emphasising that offerings are infused with intangible religious sentiment, the Court directed TTD to place on record an immediate reform plan along with a long-term strategy involving mechanisation, digitalisation, and the use of Artificial Intelligence.

The matter has been listed for further compliance.

[M Sreenivasulu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.]

Read Details / 2 months ago

MahiraBookmark

Andhra Pradesh High Court Orders Reservation for Transgender Persons in Six Months

The Andhra Pradesh High Court directed the State Government to grant reservation for transgender persons in public employment within six months, recognising them as one of the most socially and economically marginalised communities.

Justice Nyapathy Vijay held that their exclusion from family, social, and political life justified affirmative action under Articles 16(4) and 16(4A) of the Constitution.

The Court ordered the government to frame comprehensive policies that ensure equality, representation, and the protection of transgender persons across all public sectors. It emphasised that inclusion and dignity must replace discrimination and invisibility in governance and employment.

[Katru Rekha v State of Andhra Pradesh]

Read Order / 3 months ago

MamiraBookmark

Denial of Terminal Benefits to Retired Employees Violates Article 21: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that the state government’s failure to release terminal benefits to retired employees amounted to a violation of their fundamental right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Court observed that the erosion of traditional values of respect toward senior citizens was a distressing trend in modern society.

The Court emphasised that timely disbursal of pensions and retirement dues is vital for the survival of senior citizens and directed the state to clear all pending benefits with interest, treating delayed payment as a form of deprivation.

[Chittiboyina Bharata Rao v The Krishna District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd]

Read Details / 3 months ago

YashashviBookmark

Andhra Pradesh to Examine Reservation for Transgender Persons in Public Jobs

The Andhra Pradesh High Court directed the State Government to take a positive decision on extending reservation to transgender persons in public employment, similar to Karnataka’s policy of 1% horizontal reservation.

A Division Bench of Justices Battu Devanand and A. Hari Haranadha Sarma was informed that the Karnataka Government had implemented such a reservation following a High Court order.

The Bench was hearing an appeal challenging the exclusion of transgender persons from Sub-Inspector recruitment.

The matter will be heard again on November 24.

[Matam Gangabhavani v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr]

Read Details / 3 months ago

MamiraBookmark

Andhra Pradesh High Court: Partial Unit Shutdown Constitutes Closure Under ID Act

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that shutting down even a portion of an industrial unit qualifies as “closure” under Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, when the unit is functionally integrated with the larger establishment.

The Court clarified that in such cases, affected workmen are entitled to closure compensation rather than reinstatement in other operational units, and noted that the petitioner’s unit had ceased operations permanently and all statutory dues had been duly settled.

The Court held that, since the other units were distinct establishments located in separate districts, the workman’s plea for absorption in those units was untenable.

3 months ago

MananBookmark

DGP-Level CID Probe Ordered Into Tirumala Temple Theft, Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ordered a DGP-rank CID officer to investigate the 2023 theft of offerings at the Tirumala temple, citing a “complete compromise” by the investigating officer and TTD officials.

Justice Gannamaneni Ramakrishna found lapses in not invoking Section 409 IPC against accused CV Ravi Kumar, a public servant, and criticised the Lok Adalat’s compounding of a non-compoundable offence.

The Court noted ₹14.5 crore worth of properties were accepted from the accused without due process and directed an Anti-Corruption Bureau DGP to probe his family’s assets.

The Court also ordered administrative action against the Tirupati magistrate involved.

[M Sreenivasulu v The State of Andhra Pradesh and Others]

Read Details / 3 months ago

MananBookmark

Plea Challenges BNSS Handcuffing Rule as Unconstitutional: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has asked the Central Government to respond to a petition challenging Section 43(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023, which permits police to handcuff accused persons in serious offences.

The petitioner submitted that the impugned provision confers unfettered discretion upon police authorities, resulting in the stigmatisation of individuals before conviction, and thereby infringes Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

The plea also contended that handcuffing should remain an exception, not a routine practice, and could be permitted when there is a clear and reasonable risk of escape.

[Keyur Akkiraju v Union of India]

Read Details / 4 months ago

KhushaliBookmark

Enroll Now!