Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 22 - Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 30Nominal IndexX v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 22Bhashapaka Pragna Vardhini v. State of Telangana & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 23Palivela Ravikumar & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 24Om Prakash Sharma v. Directorate of Enforcement 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 25M/s Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. v. State of Telangana...
Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 22 - Citations: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 30
Nominal Index
X v. Y 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 22
Bhashapaka Pragna Vardhini v. State of Telangana & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 23
Palivela Ravikumar & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 24
Om Prakash Sharma v. Directorate of Enforcement 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 25
M/s Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. v. State of Telangana & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 26
Mangali Bhargav Kumar v. State of Telangana & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 27
X v. State of Telangana & Anr. 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 28
Kalluru Soubhagya v. State of Telangana 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 29
Telangana Small Scale Industries Steel and Wooden Furniture Manufacturers Association & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Ors. 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 30
Judgments/ Orders This Week
Case title: X v. Y
Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 22
The Telangana High Court has set aside a trial court order directing DNA test of a minor child to determine paternity in a matrimonial dispute, holding that a child cannot be used as "pawn" to establish allegations of adultery against the mother wherein the husband can prove the allegation without sacrificing the child's identity.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Renuka Yara observed that the question of directing DNA testing must be assessed “through the prism of the child” and not merely through the interests of the contesting spouses. Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Aparna Ajinkya Firodia v. Ajinkya Arun Firodia, the Court quoted:
“DNA tests of children born during the subsistence of valid marriage may be directed, only when there is sufficient prima-facie material to dislodge the presumption under Section 112 of the Evidence Act. Further, if no plea has been raised has to non-access in order to rebut the presumption under Section 112 of the Evidence Act a DNA test may not be directed… The child cannot be used as a pawn to show that the mother of the child was living in adultery. It is always open to the respondent husband to prove by other evidence the adulterous conduct of the wife, but the child's right to identity should not be allowed to be sacrificed… To enable one of the parties to the marriage to have the benefit of fair trial, the Court cannot sacrifice the rights and best interests of a third party to the lis, namely, the child.”
Case Title: Bhashapaka Pragna Vardhini v. State of Telangana & Ors.
Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 23
The Telangana High Court has held that educational institutions cannot withhold original academic certificates of students on the ground of non-payment of fees, observing that such certificates are the property of the student and cannot be retained as leverage to recover dues.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Surepalli Nanda observed:
“The respondent no. 4 [university] cannot withhold the petitioner's original educational certificates (documents including the Marks Sheet and Degree Certificate) under any pretext. There is no lien on the certificate of the students since the certificate of the student is his/her property. This Court opines that the right of students to obtain their Certificates from one institution to join another institution cannot be denied by the concerned authorities merely because the tuition fee is due and if any amount is due from the petitioner towards such fees, the proper course available to the respondents is to initiate appropriate proceedings for recovery before the competent Court and coercive tactics cannot be adopted by the respondents to make the petitioner pay the tuition fee.”
Case Title: Palivela Ravikumar & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Anr.
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 24
The Telangana High Court has held that criminal proceedings cannot be quashed merely because the police registered a case under the BNS 2023, even though the alleged offence occurred prior to the enactment of the new criminal law framework.
The BNS came into force from July 1, 2024 replace the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The Court clarified that such an error does not vitiate the proceedings, as the trial court can examine the allegations and frame appropriate charges under the correct law.
Case Title: Om Prakash Sharma v. Directorate of Enforcement
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 25
Quashing a money laundering case against a chartered accountant and a businessman accused of assisting in layering of funds in an alleged bank fraud case, the Telangana High Court observed that prosecution under PMLA cannot be sustained based on uncorroborated statements of co-accused.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice E.V. Venugopal while referring to Supreme Court judgments observed:
"When the facts and circumstances of the case on hand are tested on the touchstone of the above proposition of law raid down by the Hon'ble supreme court, the same squarely applies to the case of the petitioners entitling them for discharge from the present criminal prosecution as basing on the uncorroborated statements of co-accused recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA, without any independent documentary or electronic evidence establishing a prior meeting of minds, control over funds, ownership or operation of accounts, or enjoyment of proceeds of crime the petitioners are arrayed as accused"
Case Title: M/s Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. v. State of Telangana & Ors.
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 26
The Telangana High Court refused to interfere with process initiated by labour authorities to conduct a secret ballot election for determining the majority representative trade union, holding that such a process is integral to industrial democracy promoting democratic representation for workmen.
Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka, dismissing the writ petition filed by Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd., observed:
“The apprehension expressed by petitioner that conduct of elections would disturb industrial peace, adversely affect day-to-day operations, impede implementation of the resolution plan approved by the National Company Law Tribunal, or jeopardize the revival of the unit is speculative and unsupported by any tangible material. On the contrary, the very object of the Code of Discipline and the process of secret ballot election is to promote orderly industrial relations, provide a legitimate and democratic representative mechanism for workmen, and ensure industrial harmony.”
Case Title: Mangali Bhargav Kumar v. State of Telangana & Anr.
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 27
The Telangana High Court has quashed criminal proceedings initiated against a student accused of creating and uploading "fake" videos about a contractor and his family on YouTube after the latter allegedly failed to construct the petitioner's house within the stipulated time.
In doing so the court held that the allegations in the complaint did not attract offences under Section 420 IPC (cheating) or Section 66D (impersonation) of IT Act.
Justice Tirumala Devi Eada observed that continuation of the prosecution would amount to an abuse of process of law.
The Court, quoting the Supreme Court judgement in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, noted that an FIR may be quashed when “the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.”
Case Title: X v. State of Telangana & Anr.
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 28
Quashing an FIR against a man accused of rape on the pretext of marriage, the Telangana High Court noted that the complainant and the accused were in a consensual relationship for five years and it cannot be alleged that accused had dishonest intention of luring the complainant into a sexual relationship and deceiving her.
Justice Tirumala Devi Eada, allowing the criminal petition, observed:
“The allegations would reveal that there was consensual relationship between the petitioner and the de facto complainant. However, there is an alleged promise of marriage. The said promise of marriage is alleged to have been made five years prior to lodging of complaint. According to the contents of the complaint also, the physical relationship with the petitioner continued over a period of five years. The de facto complainant is aged 26 years as on the date of complaint, which means that when she entered into the relationship with the petitioner, she was 21 years old and was a working woman. So, she is well aware of the consequences and further, she mentioned in the complaint that when she conceived two years prior to lodging of the complaint, both of them decided to go for abortion which discloses that the de facto complainant also was willing for abortion. lt is reiterated that the de facto complainant was in a physical relationship with the petitioner for a period of five years.”
Case title: Kalluru Soubhagya v. State of Telangana
Case Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 29
The Telangana High Court has granted bail to a woman accused in a prostitution case, holding that mere presence at the alleged brothel house without independent material demonstrating active involvement, is insufficient to justify continued detention.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice K. Sujana, allowing the criminal petition, observed:
“Having considered the submissions of both sides and upon perusal of the material available on record, the allegation against the petitioner is that she acted as a sub-organizer in the alleged prostitution activity along with the main accused. However, at this stage there is no specific material to show that the petitioner owned the premises or was running the brothel house. The presence of petitioner at the premises alone, without any independent material showing her active role in managing the alleged illegal activity, requires to be examined during trial"
Case title: Telangana Small Scale Industries Steel and Wooden Furniture Manufacturers Association & Ors. v. State of Telangana & Ors.
Case citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 30
The Telangana High Court has dismissed a writ petition challenging supplementary agreements extending time for execution of a public tender, holding that non-participating bidders lack locus and that contractual extension of time is allowed if it is permitted under the tender conditions.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Surepalli Nanda observed:
"A bare perusal of the tender document, in particular point No.4 of the bid document clearly indicates that the validity of tender period is five (5) years and 45 days and clause 25 and 26 of the tender document, dated 26.04.2025 (referred to and extracted above) refers to delays and extension of time and clause 26 provides for levy of liquidated damages and therefore, it is settled law that when there is an extension clause and liquidated damages, time will not be the essence of the contract as held at Para 11, 32 and 35 of the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2022) 2 SCC 382 in Welspun Speciality Solutions Limited v. ONGC".