- Delhi Seemapuri Building Collapse: Several Feared Trapped As Rescue Operation Underway
- Claude Users Can Work Across Google Docs, Sheets and Slides In-App
- Rapido Ride Turns Into Nightmare After Captain Flees With Injured Passenger
- 7 Must-Watch OTT Releases For Your Dussehra Holidays
- ‘His Lips Turned Blue’: Dentist Recalls 45-Minute Effort To Save Flydubai Pilot Smit Machchhar
- Airtel Postpaid Plans Bring Free International Roaming From Rs 499
- 'Politics means nation building to him': Rajnath Singh on PM Modi's 25 years in public service
- 'Rising Together': India sets out vision for 2036 Olympic and Paralympic Games ambition
HC jails ACP for one month for defying arrest protection order
In Short
Read how the Telangana High Court sentenced Saroornagar ACP A Krishnaiah to one month in jail and a fine for wilfully disobeying interim protection orders in a dowry death case.
Share :
HC jails ACP for one month for defying arrest protection order
Hyderabad: The Telangana High Court has sentenced Saroornagar ACP A Krishnaiah to one month in jail for arresting a hospitalised accused in a dowry death case, despite its restraining order. The court also fined him Rs. 2,000 for wilfully disobeying its order.
Justice Kalasikam Sujana passed the order on September 18. The contempt case was filed by Katta Vamsi Krishna against Krishnaiah and SI V Maraiah.
The HC had granted Krishna interim protection from arrest on April 21, 2026, in criminal petition 6109. It extended the protection on April 23 and again on April 27. According to the petitioner, he was still arrested on April 28 and produced before the jurisdictional magistrate for remand. His counsel then brought the HC orders to the magistrate's notice. The magistrate rejected the remand and ordered his release.
Krishnaiah told the court he had gone ahead with the arrest due to "pressure" on him; he did not know the protection had been extended. The police argued that neither the petitioner nor his counsel had given a copy of the April 27 order before the arrest. He tendered an unconditional apology and said the violation was neither intentional nor wilful.
The court rejected these submissions. Justice Sujana noted that Krishnaiah already knew about the first order protecting the petitioner. Once told that the protection had been extended, he should have checked the case status with the public prosecutor or on the HC website. His failure to do so amounted to disobedience. It found his explanation for not knowing about the later orders unsatisfactory.
The court cleared the SI of the contempt charge. It noted that he was neither the investigating officer nor involved in the arrest; that no direction had been issued against him.
The contempt case was therefore allowed in part. Krishnaiah must pay the fine within four weeks.
After the order was pronounced, the public prosecutor sought suspension of the sentence so the State could file an appeal. The HC suspended the sentence until October 19.
