Telangana HC advocates resolve to boycott judge: Allege misconduct, imposition of heavy costs on lawyers; ‘we will meet CJI over grievances,' says association head
HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court Advocates' Association on Thursday unanimously passed a resolution to boycott the court of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya (Court No 5), protesting the alleged misconduct towards members of the bar and alleged imposition of heavy costs on the members while dealing with cases.
During a packed gathering at the HC, the association urged acting chief justice Sujoy Paul not to allocate any judicial duties to Justice Bhattacharya and appealed to the President of India and the Chief Justice of India for her immediate transfer from the Telangana high court. Several members of the bar, including seniors, shared their experiences in Justice Bhattacharya's court.
The association, during a general body meeting, decided to boycott Justice Bhattacharya's court starting from Monday, said association president A Jagan.
"The resolution will be in force until suitable action is taken against her. We will soon meet the CJI and present our grievance," added Jagan.
You Can Also Check:
Hyderabad AQI
|
Weather in Hyderabad
|
Bank Holidays in Hyderabad
|
Public Holidays in Hyderabad
Senior counsel V Raghunath claimed that their efforts to convey their grievances to the judge proved futile. "She did not give us an opportunity to present the facts before her," said Raghunath, former president of the bar association.
Jagan alleged that the judge was passing directions to the registry to appoint legal aid counsels even without the consent of the clients.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy
IC Markets
Tìm hiểu thêm
Undo
Another senior counsel, Kota Subba Rao, claimed that Justice Bhattacharya had imposed a fine of Rs3 lakh on him when he tried to withdraw an appeal in a motor vehicle accident case. Senior counsel P Prabhakar Reddy also claimed that in a criminal appeal seeking bail, Justice Bhattacharya imposed costs on him when he filed a petition to set aside an order directing the registry to assign a legal aid counsel in his case. "In this case, the bail application was heard more than 35 times," he claimed.
Another senior counsel, Chikkudu Prabhakar, said that the judge was not giving an opportunity to the advocates even to argue their case and was passing remarks that the advocates were not prepared to argue and adjourning the matter.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
'You misquote Trump the most': Pentagon's Pete Hegseth slams Fox News reporter in explosive briefing over Iran strike question
At a Pentagon press briefing on Thursday, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth launched a public and personal attack on journalist Jennifer Griffin , calling her 'about the worst' in the media for her reporting on the recent US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. Griffin, Fox News' chief national security correspondent, asked Hegseth if the Pentagon had certainty that all the highly enriched uranium was still inside the Fordow facility at the time of the attack. 'Do you have certainty that all the highly enriched uranium was inside the Fordow Mountain?' she asked. 'Are you certain none of that highly enriched uranium was moved?' Hegseth, visibly annoyed, responded: 'Of course, we're watching every single aspect. But, Jennifer, you've been about the worst. The one who misrepresents the most, intentionally, what the president says.' by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Elegant New Scooters For Seniors In 2024: The Prices May Surprise You Mobility Scooter | Search Ads Learn More Undo — Acyn (@Acyn) Veteran reporter defends her work Griffin, a respected journalist with over 25 years at Fox News, stood her ground. She pointed out her early and accurate reporting on the B-2 stealth bombers, their midair refuelling, and the full scope of the military mission. 'So I take issue with that,' she replied. Live Events The public nature of Hegseth's comments drew swift backlash. Brit Hume, Fox News Channel's chief political analyst, said: 'An attack she certainly in my view did not deserve. Her professionalism, her knowledge, her experience at the Pentagon is unmatched. The attack on her was unfair.' Former White House official Daniel Koh added, 'If a question shakes him, he can't handle the job.' Others, including MeidasTouch editor Ron Filipkowski, also condemned Hegseth's outburst, calling it an attack on press freedom. Trump administration rallies around the mission The clash follows a week of rising tensions over the Pentagon's handling of Operation Midnight Hunter , the codename for the strikes on Iran's Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz nuclear sites. The Trump administration has claimed 'total obliteration,' with President Trump declaring it 'a historically successful attack.' At the same press briefing, Hegseth extended his criticism to the broader media, saying, 'You, and I mean specifically you, the press corps… cheer against Trump so hard. It's like in your DNA… because you want him not to be successful, so bad.' On his Truth Social platform, Trump applauded Hegseth's performance, calling it 'one of the greatest, most professional, and most 'confirming' News Conferences I have ever seen.' Conflicting reports fuel uncertainty Despite the confident rhetoric, a leaked preliminary assessment by the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) cast doubt on the operation's full impact. The report suggested that Iran's nuclear programme may have only been delayed by a few months, and not completely dismantled. General Dan Caine, America's top military commander, declined to confirm or deny the success of the mission in definitive terms. 'We do not mark our own homework,' he said. Instead, he painted a picture of meticulous planning and execution. The Fordow site, he revealed, had been under surveillance for 15 years. 'For more than 15 years, this officer and his teammate lived and breathed this single target,' Caine said. He described how US intelligence tracked everything from geology and construction to air vents and electrical systems. Caine also showcased footage of Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs—colloquially known as 'bunker busters'—being tested, highlighting their role in the strikes. Questions over Iran's Uranium remain Concerns persist over whether Iran had moved its enriched uranium before the strike. Satellite images showed over a dozen trucks at Fordow just two days prior. Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said, 'We do not have information on the whereabouts of this material,' referring to nearly 900 pounds of uranium reportedly removed ahead of the bombing. Preliminary intelligence shared with European allies also suggested that much of Iran's stockpile was located outside the Fordow facility, possibly at undisclosed locations. Fallout: Intelligence access restricted In response to the leak of the DIA report, the White House now plans to limit the amount of classified information shared with lawmakers through the CAPNET system. House Speaker Mike Johnson said, 'There was a leak, and we're trying to get down to the bottom of that. It's dangerous and ridiculous that happened.' Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer criticised the move, saying, 'They seem not to want to see the facts get out. Just Trump's version of the facts, which we know is often false.' Further analysis on the strike's impact is expected in the coming days. As officials work through the aftermath, the bigger questions remain unanswered: how much uranium Iran still holds, where it is stored, and whether the US strike truly crippled Iran's nuclear ambitions—or simply scattered them further underground.
Time of India
23 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Never accepted Constitution': Congress hits back at RSS; cites SC ruling on 'secular, socialist'
Jairam Ramesh and Dattatreya Hosabale (R) NEW DELHI: Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh on Friday sharply criticised the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), saying it has never accepted the Constitution on has been attacking its framers from the very beginning. His remarks came in response to RSS general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale, who a day earlier had said that the words "Socialist" and "Secular" were forcibly added to the Constitution and should now be reconsidered. In a post on X, Jairam Ramesh said, "The RSS has NEVER accepted the Constitution of India. It attacked Dr. Ambedkar, Nehru, and others involved in its framing from Nov 30, 1949, onwards. In the RSS's own words, the Constitution was not inspired by Manusmriti. The RSS and the BJP have repeatedly given the call for a new Constitution. This was Mr Modi's campaign cry during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. The people of India decisively rejected this cry. Yet the demands for changing the basic structure of the Constitution continue to be made by the RSS ecosystem." He also pointed to a Supreme Court judgment from November 2024 that rejected petitions challenging the 42nd Constitutional Amendment, which had inserted the words "Socialist" and "Secular" into the Preamble. Ramesh commented, "The Chief Justice of India himself delivered a judgment on November 25, 2024, on the issue now being raised by a leading RSS functionary. Would it be asking too much to request him to take the trouble to read it?" The judgment said, "The writ petitions do not require a detailed adjudication as the flaws and weaknesses in the arguments are obvious and manifest. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Si vous voulez passer du temps sur votre ordinateur, ce jeu de stratégie est un must en 2025. Forge Of Empires Jouer Undo Two expressions—'secular' and 'socialist', and the word 'integrity' were inserted in the Preamble vide the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976... The power to amend unquestionably rests with the Parliament. This power to amend extends to the Preamble. .." The top court also referenced past landmark rulings, including Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala and SR Bommai vs Union of India, which reinforced that secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution. Ramesh further mentioned that the inclusion of the words was reviewed even after the Emergency, during discussions on the 45th Amendment Bill in 1978. Meanwhile, Dattatreya Hosabale, while speaking at a program on the 50th anniversary of the Emergency, said, "The Emergency wasn't just a misuse of power, but an attempt to crush civil liberties. Millions were imprisoned, and freedom of the press was suppressed. He said that those who imposed the Emergency and trampled the Constitution and democracy have never apologised."
Time of India
29 minutes ago
- Time of India
Chhattisgarh HC grants bail to minor in POCSO case; cites education, mental health, and social report
RAIPUR: The Chhattisgarh High Court has set aside orders from lower courts, granting bail to a juvenile accused in a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The applicant, a 16-year-old, was in an observation home since 16 February 2025. The surety, who is the father of the juvenile in conflict with law, will also provide an undertaking that the juvenile will not come in contact with any "bad element" and that the police station will be informed if he engages in any unlawful act, the court ordered. The social status report concluded that denying bail to the juvenile would negatively impact his education, examinations, and mental state, and that granting bail would be appropriate considering his overall development. The Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal allowed a revision petition filed under Section 102 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court (POCSO), Balod, and the Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Balod, had earlier rejected the bail application of the juvenile. The case involves registered at Balod police station for alleged offences under Sections 137(2) and 65(1) of BNS, and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act . by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Cuối cùng, chơi miễn phí game chiến thuật hay nhất 2025! Sea of Conquest Phát ngay Undo The victim's mother lodged the First Information Report (FIR), stating that the applicant abducted her minor daughter on February 14, 2025. The victim was found with the applicant near a river the following day and later informed her parents that the applicant had established a physical relationship with her. The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant is innocent, has no criminal history, and has been falsely implicated. He also stated that there is no likelihood of the applicant's release bringing him into association with known criminals or exposing him to moral, physical, or psychological danger. The Public Prosecutor for the State opposed the bail, citing that the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report was awaited. However, he confirmed that the social status report favoured the applicant and he had no prior criminal antecedents. Notably, the victim's parents, who appeared through video conferencing from the concerned District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), raised no objection to granting bail to the applicant. The court referenced Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, which mandates the release of a child in conflict with law on bail unless specific conditions are met, such as a likelihood of association with criminals, exposure to danger, or defeating the ends of justice. The report submitted by the Probation Officer highlighted that the juvenile lives with his parents in Tapara village, Balod district. Both parents are daily wage labourers. The juvenile is a regular Class 11 student at a government higher secondary school in Gurur and has resided in a government tribal hostel since Class 6. The report stated that his parents, neighbours, teachers, and hostel superintendent described his behaviour and conduct as good. He has no prior history of associating with anti-social elements or engaging in unlawful activities. The report also mentioned that the victim is of the same age group as the applicant, and they had a friendship and romantic relationship, communicating over the phone. The juvenile's practical examinations were from 5 March to 12 March 2025, and his annual examinations were scheduled from 18 March 2025. He expressed a desire to appear for his exams. The court observed that the social status report did not indicate that releasing the applicant on bail would bring him into association with any known criminal, expose him to moral, physical, or psychological danger, or otherwise defeat the ends of justice. The High Court directed the applicant's parents or guardian to furnish a personal bond of Rs 25,000 with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned court. The applicant will be released into the custody of the guardian upon furnishing the bond and submitting copies of their Aadhaar card and a coloured postcard-size photograph, to be verified by the trial court.
