98-Year-Old Farmer Approaches HC Against Merging Ameenpur Civic Body
Hyderabad: A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court admitted a writ petition filed by a 98-year-old agriculturist challenging the constitutional validity of the Telangana Municipalities (Amendment) Act, 2026 (3rd Act of 2026) and the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (Second Amendment) Act, 2026 (2nd Amendment of 2026). The panel, comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin, was dealing with the petition stating that these legal regulations, which effectively dissolved the Ameenpur municipality and merged its jurisdiction with the GHMC, were arbitrary and violated constitutional rights. It is alleged that the petitioner, an active agriculturist who uses his land for farming, is directly affected by the said changes. He claimed that the proposed restructuring fundamentally changed the regulatory, financial and development regime that applied to his property, including its classification and permitted land use. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the exclusion of Ameenpur municipality from Schedule I of the Main Act constituted a “de facto dissolution” without complying with the mandatory safeguards under Article 243U, which provides for municipalities (urban local bodies) to have a fixed period of five years from their first meeting. In order to ensure democratic continuity, elections for the establishment of a new municipality must be completed before the end of this period or within six months in case of early termination.
He would point out that the action of the authorities to first strip Ameenpur of its municipal status and later include it in GHMC was a bypass of constitutional requirements aimed at bypassing procedural fairness and the rights of elected representatives and local residents. These changes were claimed to have significant civilian consequences. He argued that the absence of procedural fairness made the legislative act manifestly arbitrary and constitutionally invalid. The petition also expressed concerns about the impact of the change in question on democratic representation, stating that this move disrupted the functioning of an elected local body and delayed the holding of municipal elections, thus undermining participatory governance. After hearing the arguments, the bench observed that the matter was expected to raise important constitutional questions about the limits of legislative power over municipal bodies and the applicability of safeguards under Article 243U, particularly in cases involving restructuring or absorption of local government institutions. Thereupon, the panel adjourned the matter, giving the defendant time to submit his counter-statement.
Woman challenges Muslim husband’s right to file for divorce in family court
The Telangana High Court will examine the jurisdiction of the Family Courts to entertain husband’s divorce petitions under uncodified Muslim personal law in a writ petition challenging the maintainability of such proceedings and direct the respondents to file their replies. Justice N. Tukaram was dealing with a writ petition filed by his wife attacking the case initiated by her husband before the Main Family Court, Hyderabad, on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction. Mohammad Adnan, counsel for the petitioner, argued that in the absence of any legal framework prescribing grounds for a husband to seek divorce through a judicial forum, the Family Court has no jurisdiction to entertain such a petition.
He argued that there were conflicting decisions between partition committees and single judges in the High Courts regarding this issue, and that some courts ruled that a husband could apply to the court only in ‘talaq-i mubarat’ cases, where a decision based on justifications was not required. The Applicant therefore requested a declaration that the proceedings before the Family Court were unlawful, unauthorized and contrary to the provisions of the Family Courts Act and the applicable principles of personal law. Taking into account the relevant constitutional and legal implications, the Court directed the respondents to submit their responses.
Bail for lawyer in traffic accident case
The Telangana High Court has granted bail to a lawyer accused of deliberately hitting a motorcycle with a car during a chase. The judge was hearing the criminal petition filed by Marikanti Madhawaraj, who had sought bail in connection with an offense registered at Shamshabad police station for offenses under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. According to the prosecution, the incident occurred on March 19 when the complainant and his friend chased a car in which the complainant’s wife was traveling. It was stated that at Aramghar junction, the car overturned and hit the complainant’s bike, causing injuries.
The complainant alleged that the act was intentional and constituted attempted murder. The applicant’s lawyer argued that there was no intention to cause death and that the case arose from personal disagreements, and stated that the applicant was a lawyer representing the complainant’s wife in the divorce case. It was stated that the applicant has been in judicial custody since March 19 and a significant part of the investigation has been completed.
The state opposed the defense, arguing that the crime was serious and the victim was still under treatment and medical reports were awaited. Taking into account the nature of the allegations, the stage of the investigation and the duration of detention, the judge stated that there was no need for continued detention despite the ongoing investigation and allowed the bail request.
