No Trial in 9 Months, Accused Gets Bail in Tainted Toddy Case

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court granted bail to an accused in connection with the alleged adulteration of toddy, which reportedly caused several deaths and serious illnesses in Hyderabad. The judge was dealing with a criminal petition filed by Kuna Saiteja Goud, booked under the NDPS Act and Telangana Excise Act in connection with a case registered at Balanagar prohibition and excise station. According to the prosecution, in July 2025, several confectionery consumers in Kukatpally fell ill after consuming adulterated toddy. It was stated that investigations revealed that toddy samples taken from a store affiliated with the defendants contained alprazolam, a controlled substance. The defendant allegedly adulterated the substance to increase demand, resulting in hospitalizations and reported deaths. Petitioner’s counsel argued that the allegations were false and based primarily on inadmissible confessional statements, and that no contraband was recovered from the defendant. It was submitted that the prosecution failed to ascertain the quantity of the alleged substance that would attract the NDPS Act and that there was no direct evidence linking the accused to the alleged deaths. The state opposed the defense, arguing that the defendant was the main person behind the adulteration and that the crime had serious public health consequences. The court observed that the accused has been kept in judicial custody for over nine months, the trial is yet to commence and is unlikely to be concluded in the near future. The judge decided that continued detention would not serve a useful purpose and he was released on bail.

Seizure of work machines stopped

Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy of the Telangana High Court quashed district collector Jangaon’s case regarding seizure of machines and imposition of penalty on the ground that the action lacked legal basis and violated the principles of natural justice. The judge is taking up the pleas of Orsu Sujaatha and other earthmoving contractors to seize their machines and impose fines exceeding Rs 10 lakh. The case of the petitioners is that they were engaged by a private party to carry out gravel and land grading work on private land and the authorities misinterpreted this activity as commercial excavation. It was claimed that the vehicles were seized without notice or hearing. It was stated that during the investigation carried out by the state, it was determined that illegal excavations were carried out and gravel and mud were carried. The machines were allegedly seized due to lack of permits under the Telangana Water, Land and Trees Act, 2002. The judge found that the provisions did not give the authority to impose fines or seize the machinery and that the trial could not be based on any legal provision. Justice Vijaysen Reddy accordingly set aside the proceedings and directed the release of the machines while allowing the authorities to proceed again after issuing notice.

No promotion until norms are met: HC

A two-judge bench of the Telangana High Court held that police constables are not entitled to retroactive promotion unless they fulfill the eligibility conditions prescribed under the service rules and hence rejected their plea for notional promotion of an earlier date. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice GM Mohiuddin, allowed a writ appeal filed by the state, observing that promotion to the post of chief constable must strictly comply with Rule 7 of the AP Police (Civilian) Subordinate Service Rules, 1999, which mandates completion of requisite service in the civil police cadre. It was a case in which the writ petitioner was appointed as an Armed Reserve police officer in 1989 and later converted to civil police in 2010 and therefore claimed that he was entitled to promotion from 2013 on the basis of a government order reducing qualified service. It was submitted that the denial of such promotion was arbitrary, especially in the case of alleged promotion of juniors. The State argued that seniority can be maintained from the date of initial appointment, but eligibility for promotion will accrue only after completion of prescribed service in the civil police cadre and will be calculated from the date of transfer. The panel observed that the participants did not meet the mandatory requirements for promotion at the relevant time, including completion of required service and pre-promotion training. It also said that the delay in granting promotions was due to pending legal challenges related to the 2013 government order and could not be blamed on the ministry. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.