Andhra Pradesh & Telangana High Court Weekly Round-Up: 5-11 February, 2024

Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (AP) 8 To 2024 LiveLaw (AP) 11Nominal IndexDr. B. R. Ambedkar Jilla Sadhana Sammiti v. State of Andhra Pradesh 2024 LiveLaw (AP) 8 Guvvala Ramakrishna Reddy v. Guvvala Satyarnarayan Reddy 2024 LiveLaw (AP) 9 M/s Bharat Weighing Scales vs State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (AP) 10 Janepalli Srinivasa Rao Alias J.Srinivasa Rao vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 2024 LiveLaw (AP) 11Public Prosecutor Entitled To Take Independent Decision On Whether Prosecution Should Be Withdrawn Or Not: Andhra Pradesh High CourtDr. B. R. Ambedkar Jilla Sadhana Sammiti v. State of Andhra Pradesh 2024 LiveLaw (AP) 8The Andhra Pradesh High Court has passed orders iterating that although a public prosecutor is entitled to move an application under Section 321 of CrPC for withdrawal of prosecution, an independent decision must be made as to whether the prosecution of an accused is to be withdrawn or not.“Be that as it may, as an interim measure, we direct that while the Public Prosecutor is vested with the power to move an application under Section 321 Cr.P.C., yet, notwithstanding the fact that the G.O. has been issued, the principles laid down by the Apex Court and reproduced hereinabove would be followed and the Public Prosecutor would be entitled to take an independent decision as to whether the prosecution has to be withdrawn or not," it held.Can't Be Permitted To Contradict Initial Position To Create 'Substantial Question Of Law': Andhra Pradesh HC Dismisses Second AppealGuvvala Ramakrishna Reddy v. Guvvala Satyarnarayan Reddy 2024 LiveLaw (AP) 9The Andhra Pradesh High Court has dismissed a second appeal filed holding that the parties cannot blow 'hot and cold' and cannot be permitted to 'approbate or reprobate' at the same time.The order was passed by Justice B.V.L.N Chakravarthi in a second appeal filed by the defendants in a suit for partition by taking a contradictory stand to their initial stand and trying to create 'substantial questions of law' as mandated under section 100 of the CPC.“To be a substantial question of law, there must be a foundation for it laid in the pleadings, and the question should emerge from the sustainable findings of the fact, arrived at by the Courts of facts, and it must be necessary to decide that substantial question of law for a just and proper decision of the case."Controller Of Legal Metrology Can Restrict Licenses To One City; Andhra Pradesh High Court M/s Bharat Weighing Scales vs State of Andhra Pradesh and Anr.2024 LiveLaw (AP) 10The High Court of Andhra Pradesh bench comprising Justice Venkateswarlu Nimmagadda interpreted Section 23(2) of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 and Section 11(7) of the Andhra Pradesh Legal Metrology (Enforcement) Rules, 2011. The High Court held that a conjoint reading of both provisions empowered the Controller of the Legal Metrology Department to issue the license to manufacturers, dealers and repairers with geographical limits and other conditions. Further, after the issuance, the license holders are bound by such conditions and the same does not violate the fundamental right to profession, enshrined in Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution.Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail To Accused Who Allegedly 'Stabbed' CM YS Jagan Mohan Reddy At Vizag Airport In 2018Janepalli Srinivasa Rao Alias J.Srinivasa Rao vs. State of Andhra Pradesh 2024 LiveLaw (AP) 11The Andhra Pradesh High Court has granted bail to J. Srinivasa Rao, accused of allegedly stabbing Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Y.S Jagan Mohan Reddy in 2018 in the VIP lounge of Vishakapatnam Airport. The Court held that merely using a weapon, and committing an act of violence would not inadvertently amount to an offense under section 3A (offense at airport) of the Suppression of Unlawful Act against Safety of Civil Aviations Act, 1982, unless such act was likely to cause grievous injury or death. It held:"From the above available facts, for the purpose of considering the bail application, we are satisfied that the violence allegedly committed by the accused neither caused grievous hurt or death nor is likely to cause grievous hurt or death. As rightly argued by the petitioner, mere using the device, substance or weapon and committing the act of violence is not the be all and end all of the offence U/s 3A unless such violence is likely to cause grievous hurt or death of any person which is not the case in the present instance."Nominal Index Citations: 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 24 To 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 29)Sardar Jasbeer Singh v. State of Telangana 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 24 East Hyderabad Expressway Limited vs The Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority and another. 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 25 Pollodi Jayamma v. State of Telangana 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 26 R.Mallesh v. State of Telangana 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 27 Prahitha Construction Private Limited vs Union of India and 3 others 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 28 Bairam Muralidhar v. State of Telangana 2024 LiveLaw (Tel) 29Lawyers Filing PILs Need To ...

Andhra Pradesh & Telangana High Court Weekly Round-Up: 5-11 February, 2024

Fareedunnisa Huma

Tags