Telangana High Court Expresses Surprise by the Explanation of Police to Use Lathies Against Vehicles for Checking COVID-19

Must Read

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract....

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish...

Follow us

The police had used police lathies against vehicles to check the presence of Coronavirus. On this explanation of the police, the Telangana High Court expressed surprise.

Submission of the Petitioner

The petitioner submitted that the action of the police is arbitrary and unjust. The action of the police was contrary to fundamental and constitutional rights. They violated rights under Article 14, 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India. They also misused their power.

The local persons had stepped out for groceries. However, a sub-inspector of Moghalpura Police Station abused them. Moreover, there is a video circulating over the internet of the said incident. The police had assaulted Mr Mohd Asgar and beaten Mr Khaleem. They even assaulted a handicapped person.

The police personnel, Mr K. Hanumanth Kumar attacked Mr Junaid. Due to the brutal attack, he has suffered thirty-five stitches on his face. He has also suffered a hairline fracture. Further, the police personnel of Falakhnuma Police Station has damaged the vehicles.

The petitioner prayed to the Court to direct the respondents to pay the medical expenses of the injured persons. He prayed to conduct an inquiry against the police of the incidents in detail.

Submission of the Respondents

The police said that they had not assaulted Mr Mohd Asgar. The police personnel was approaching his area. After seeing this he tried to run away and fell down. The police claimed that they had not beaten Mr Khaleem. After seeing the police personnel, he tried to run away and fell into a manhole. This was the reason for a fracture on his right leg. The police also denied the allegation of assaulting a handicapped person. Further, the police claimed that he is a regular violator of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act. The police also informed that thirteen Traffic Challans are hanging against him.

In another case, Mr Junaid was driving the two-wheeler without wearing a mask and helmet. Moreover, an altercation had taken place between the police and Mr Junaid. The lathi belonging to HG Hanumanth Kumar hit and broke the spectacles of Mr Junaid. It caused a bleeding injury under his right eye. Moreover, according to the police, immediately, they took him to the Hospital. The police claimed that they did not want to damage the vehicles. They used police lathies to check the two-wheelers for Coronavirus.

Observation of the Court

The police had not submitted the report of the injury of Mr Mohd Asgar along with the counter-affidavit. Even in the case of Mr Khaleem, they had not filed the injury report. The police claimed that they shifted him to the Osmania General Hospital. But they did not file the medical report of the Osmania General Hospital. Also, the report was not attached to the Counter Affidavit.

Order of the Court

The Court directed the respondents to submit the injury reports of the injured. The police would also submit the statements if any recorded by the police. The police would inform the Court about the progress of the departmental inquiries. The Court directed the respondents to submit the report before this Court on or before 29.06.2020.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

Latest News

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board & Anr., via video-conferencing. Deeming the...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish Bisht & Anr. v. State...

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Against National Stock Exchange For Lack Of Merit

In the case of A. Kumar v. Financial Intelligence Unit & Ors., A. Kumar filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution...

The Federal Appeals Court Holds Trump’s Diversion of Military Funds To Build the Wall To Be Unlawful

The Federal Appeals Court held that US President Donald Trump’s diversion of military funds to build the wall is unlawful. A grey area in the...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Filed Challenging the Judgment of Madras High Court in Ganesan v. State Represented by Its Inspector of Police

An appeal was filed before the Supreme court, challenging the judgment & order of Madras High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the HC judgment...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -