Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 268 – 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 275

Nominal Index

Putta Venu Gopal Chowdary v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr., 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 268

Balagam Rama Lakshmi v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 269

Sabena Prakash v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 270

S. Saraswathi & Others v. Ganesh Ashok Pewer & Another, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 271

Chintha Chandran & Another v. Syed Hafeez, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 272

Uyyala Lakshmi Reddy & Others v. L. Pratap Reddy & Another, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 273

Anup Kumar Satpathy v. Union of India & Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 274

Perumalla Kasi Rao v. Nukala Muralikrishna & Others, 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 275

Judgement/ Orders

AP High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Panel Advocate, Says Lawyers Can't Be Prosecuted For Giving Legal Opinion

Case Title :  Putta Venu Gopal Chowdary v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr

Case Number :  Criminal Petition No. 4204 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 268

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that advocates cannot be unnecessarily implicated in criminal cases merely for rendering a legal opinion, in the absence of tangible evidence connecting them with the alleged conspiracy.

While quashing criminal proceedings against a panel advocate of Shriram Finance Limited, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Tuhin Kumar Gedela emphasised that prosecution must be supported by legitimate grounds and incriminating material connecting the advocate with the alleged offences.

AP High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order, Says Reliance On Previously Nullified Grounds Vitiates Subjective Satisfaction

Case Title :  Balagam Rama Lakshmi v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others

Case Number :  Writ Petition No. 16461 of 2026

Citation :  2026 LiveLaw (AP) 269

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has quashed a man's preventive detention order, holding that grounds forming part of an earlier detention order quashed by the Court could not be relied upon again, even alongside fresh grounds of detention.

The Court held that such reliance vitiated the detaining authority's subjective satisfaction, warranting the detenu's release unless required in another pending case.

Transit Remand Not Mandatory If Arrested Person Is Produced Before Jurisdictional Magistrate Within 24 Hours: AP High Court

Case Title :  Sabena Prakash v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others

Case Number :  Writ Petition No. 26235 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 270

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that obtaining transit remand from a Magistrate in the place of arrest is not mandatory where a person arrested outside the jurisdiction is produced directly before the jurisdictional Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest, excluding the time necessary for the journey.

While dismissing a habeas corpus petition challenging the remand of a man arrested in Karnataka and brought to Andhra Pradesh, the Court held that the expression “nearest Magistrate” under Article 22(2) of the Constitution must be understood with reference to time and not merely physical distance.

Aadhaar Card Age Not Conclusive: AP High Court Relies On Age Mentioned In Post-Mortem Report To Enhance Accident Compensation

Case Title :  S. Saraswathi & Others v. Ganesh Ashok Pewer & Another

Case Number :  M.A.C.M.A. Nos. 2510 and 1532 of 2018

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 271

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that age recorded in an Aadhaar card cannot be accepted as conclusive proof and relied on the age mentioned in the post-mortem report of an accident victim to calculate the accident compensation to be granted to his kin.

In doing so the court enhanced the compensation from Rs. 7.33 Lakh to Rs.11.27 Lakh, noting that the age mentioned in Aadhaar card which was 48 years was incorrect as the actual age of the deceased as per post mortem report was 45 years on which mutiplier of '14' should be applied to compute compensation

Failure To Deposit Stamp Duty Within 15 Days Renders Auction Sale Void, Executing Court Cannot Extend Deadline: AP High Court

Case Title :  Chintha Chandran & Another v. Syed Hafeez

Case Number :  Civil Revision Petition Nos. 89 and 262 of 2026

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 272

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that failure to deposit the prescribed stamp duty within 15 days of an auction renders the sale void, and the executing court cannot extend the deadline by invoking its inherent powers under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

It further observed that under Order XXI Rule 85 CPC, as applicable in Andhra Pradesh, the auction purchaser must deposit the full purchase money and the prescribed stamp duty within 15 days of the sale. 

The Court also emphasised that an order affecting a party's rights cannot be passed without giving the affected party an opportunity of hearing and recording reasons.

Future Prospects Must Be Considered For Fixed-Salary Employees In Accident Claims: AP High Court

Case Title :  Uyyala Lakshmi Reddy & Others v. L. Pratap Reddy & Another

Case Number :  M.A.C.M.A. No. 2093 of 2012

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 273

Enhancing motor accident compensation from ₹3.85 lakh to ₹7.74 lakh the Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that future prospects must be added while calculating the income of a deceased person who was employed on a fixed salary.

The Court observed that the deceased, who was working as a security guard and earning ₹4,238 per month, was entitled to a 40% addition towards future prospects. It further held that the multiplier must be determined based on the age of the deceased, rather than the age of the deceased's mother.

AP High Court Directs News Channel To Take Down Disputed Videos Of Railway Officer

Case Title :  Anup Kumar Satpathy v. Union of India & Others

Case Number :  Writ Petition No. 37689 of 2022

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 274

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has directed News Television Network Pvt. Ltd., which operates News 8 Odia, to remove videos allegedly containing false claims that a senior railway officer had absconded from duty, along with doctored audio recordings purportedly of his conversations with staff members.

The Court also restrained the company from re-uploading or causing the disputed material to be re-uploaded through any account or channel under its control.

The Court considered the direction necessary to prevent the continued circulation of the disputed material while the police investigation was pending. It clarified that the direction did not reflect any opinion on the truth of the allegations or the culpability of any person.

AP High Court Restores Specific Performance Suit; Says Disputed Issues Of Sale Agreement, Identification Of Land Requires Trial

Case Title :  Perumalla Kasi Rao v. Nukala Muralikrishna & Others

Case Number :  Appeal Suit Nos. 82, 83 and 84 of 2013

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (AP) 275

The Andhra Pradesh High Court set aside a trial court order which rejected a 16-year-old suit for specific performance of a sale agreement, holding that disputed questions of whether agreement was a concluded contract, the person executing it could bind the other owners, and whether the property was sufficiently identified required trial.

The Court allowed the appeals filed by the plaintiff, restored the suit and directed him to deposit he balance sale consideration of ₹2.28 crore by the way of fixed deposits within 10 days. It also directed the trial court to dispose of the suit expeditiously, preferably within six months.