Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Right to Promotion is Legitimate Expectation; Marriage-Based Transfer Can't Defeat It: Himachal Pradesh High Court
12 Mar 2026
Section 4 Official Secrets Act Presumption and Prima Facie Evidence Bar Bail in Espionage Case: Punjab & Haryana HC
14 Mar 2026
Centre Revokes Wangchuk's NSA Detention Amid SC Challenge
14 Mar 2026
No Interference Allowed in Religious Prayers on Private Premises: Allahabad HC Cites Maranatha Precedent
14 Mar 2026
No Proof of Absolute Ownership by Mizo Chiefs Bars Fundamental Rights Claim Under Article 31: Supreme Court
14 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
Nalla Balu @ Durgam Shashidhar Goud – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA, HYDERABAD * * *
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 4905 OF 2025 Between:
Nalla Balu @ Durgam Shashidhar Goud Petitioner/Accused VERSUS
1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana.
2. G.Satish Respondents CRIMINAL PETITION No. 4903 OF 2025 Between:
Nalla Balu @ Durgam Shashidhar Goud Petitioner/Accused VERSUS
1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana.
2. MA Wasim Akram Respondents CRIMINAL PETITION No. 8416 OF 2025 Between:
Nalla Balu @ Durgam Shashidhar Goud Petitioner/Accused VERSUS
1. The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana.
The judgment established the importance of proving mensrea and actus reus in defamation cases, the requirement for authorization from the aggrieved person, and the high threshold for placing restrict....
Individuals with influence on social media have a higher responsibility for their messages and cannot escape consequences by issuing apologies.
The twits made by the petitioner did not constitute the offence of defamation under Sections 499 & 500 of IPC.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article