Telangana High Court Dismisses Appeal in Criminal Probe; Warns Officials in Contempt Case

Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court held that the intra-court challenge against the interim order passed during the criminal investigation is not maintainable.

The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Aparash Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin dismissed the appeal filed by Mobilization Operation India Trust on the threshold. The foundation had appealed the interim decision prohibiting it from transferring its real estate until the investigation into the alleged financial irregularities was completed.

The matter arose from a writ petition filed by Gowripaga Albert, seeking an investigation into alleged violations of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) and the Prevention of Corruption Act and requesting that the investigation be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The Single Judge had previously directed that the status quo regarding the Foundation’s properties be maintained.

Opposing this, the Foundation argued that the interim order went beyond the scope of the writ petition and was contrary to the Supreme Court’s earlier orders, which were limited to freezing accounts of corporate expenses and did not extend to restriction of property transactions.

Dismissing these allegations, the Division Bench observed that the core issue in the writ petition relates to allegations of financial irregularities giving rise to criminal consequences under the FCRA framework, bringing the matter within the purview of criminal jurisdiction. It held that such interim orders did not require interference with intra-court appellate jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal as unsustainable.

In a separate case, the Supreme Court warned senior officials of the Irrigation Department of coercive action for disobeying its earlier instructions in a contempt matter.

Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwar Rao was hearing a contempt petition filed by P. Lakshminarayana, who alleged that he deliberately disobeyed court orders granting him monetary relief from the date of regularization of his services in 1991.

The petitioner had previously applied to the Supreme Court in 2019 and claimed that although his services were regulated as of November 16, 1991, he was deprived of financial aid as of this date, while young people in a similar position received these aid. The court had allowed his writ petition, declaring the rejection illegal and confirming that he was competent in the matter.

The petitioner initiated a defamation case against the Principal Secretary of the Irrigation and CAD Department and other officials, alleging continued non-compliance.

Taking serious notice of inaction, the Court warned that if the order was not implemented, the Principal Secretary to the Government would be directed to appear in court personally.