AI Overview...
-
Surepally Srinivas - Convicted under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985; the case involved appeals challenging the conviction. The Supreme Court reviewed the case, emphasizing non-compliance with legal requirements and procedural lapses that led to the appellate decision favoring the State of Chhattisgarh. Surepally Srinivas VS State of Andhra Pradesh (Now State of Telangana) - Supreme Court, Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit VS State of Bihar - Patna
-
Supreme Court Judgment 2025 - The Court summarized legal principles concerning drug-related offenses, highlighting the importance of strict adherence to procedural laws and proper compliance to uphold convictions under the NDPS Act. The Court’s review reaffirmed the necessity for procedural correctness in such cases. Surepally Srinivas VS State of Andhra Pradesh (Now State of Telangana) - Supreme Court, Amit Kumar @ Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit VS State of Bihar - Patna
-
Legal Proceedings & Orders - Multiple orders and orders-in-writ petitions (W.P.No.36609 of 2024, batch) indicate ongoing judicial scrutiny into cases involving similar facts, with courts extending relief based on procedural considerations and previous judgments. Orders also reflect the Court’s stance on regularization and service-related issues, emphasizing adherence to legal standards. K. Srinivas vs State of Telangana - Telangana, Chinni Srinivas Reddy vs State of Telangana - Telangana, Tadavarthi Sri Anjaneya Gupta vs Yellanki Srinivas - Telangana
-
Specific Cases & Allegations - The FIR in one case involved allegations of voyeuristic activity via CCTV, with subsequent affidavits and counter-affidavits detailing evidence and procedural steps taken by authorities. These cases demonstrate the Court’s approach to privacy violations and criminal conduct investigations. Kollu Srinivas vs The State of Telangana - Telangana, Mohammed Rafiuddin Memorial Educational Society vs Osmania University - Telangana
-
Representation & Legal Submissions - Petitions and applications for permission to make submissions as party-in-person were granted, indicating the Court’s openness to diverse procedural arguments and ensuring fair hearing. Bura Srinivas vs The State of Telangana And 4 Others - Telangana
Analysis and Conclusion:
The overarching theme from these sources is the Supreme Court’s focus on procedural compliance, the importance of adherence to legal standards in criminal and service cases, and the Court’s role in ensuring justice through careful review of evidence and procedural lapses. The case of Surepally Srinivas in 2025 exemplifies the Court’s scrutiny of drug convictions under the NDPS Act, emphasizing procedural correctness and the need for proper legal compliance to sustain convictions and orders.
Search Results for "Surepally Srinivas 2025"
2025 3 Supreme 765 • India - Supreme Court
DIPANKAR DATTA, MANMOHAN
The appellants before the High Court, after being jointly tried, were convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 8(c) read with Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [NDPS Act] and all of them, except the appellant Surepally Srinivas [A-1], ... State of Chattisgarh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 110 were placed in support of the contentions that the appeals deserve to be allowed by setting aside the conviction. 8. Mr.
2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 11468 • India - High Court of Rajasthan (Jaipur Bench)
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J
Surepally Srinivas Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh (Criminal Appeal No.1474 of 2025) 3. Edigi Ramaiah & Ors. Vs. ... Order 27/05/2025 1. ... Second Bail Application No.514/2025) 6. Rajesh Dhakar vs State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. ... Thereafter, second bail application was filed on behalf of the petitioner however, same was dismissed as withdrawn by this court vide order dated 25.02.2025 while giving liberty to the petitioner to renew the prayer for bail after submission of res....
2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 553 • India - Patna
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
In yet another recent judgment in the case of Surepally Srinivas vs. ... State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 110 [: 2025 (2) BLJ 1 (SC)], the Hon’ble Supreme Court having reviewed the entire case laws on the subject summarised the law on the subject in the following words: – “50. ... The State of Andhra Pradesh (Now State of Telangana) reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 683, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has once again allowed the appeal after holding that there has been clearly non-compliance....
2025 0 Supreme(Telangana) 219 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA
SrinivasHC 1130C2.B. ... ORDER : SUREPALLI NANDA, J. ... Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents does not dispute the passing of orders under similar circumstances in W.P.No.36609 of 2024 and batch dated 28.02.2025. ... this Court and the observations made thereunder dated 24.03.2014 passed in W.P.Nos.37146 of 2013 and 39820 of 2013 and similar such relief admittedly had even been extended to the petitioners in W.P.No.36609 of 2024 and batch, vide orders of this Court dated 28.02.2025 ....
2025 0 Supreme(Telangana) 378 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA
ORDER : SUREPALLI NANDA, J. ... Heard Sri Sai Prasen Gundavaram, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Services-I appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri Malipeddi Srinivas Reddy learned Standing Counsel ... The Apex Court in its recent judgments pertaining to regularization of services observed as under:-_ A) The Judgment of the Apex Court dated 31.01.2025 reported in 2025 INSC 144 in “ SHRI PAL AND ANOTHER v. ... Nagar Nigam, Ghaziabad” repor....
2024 0 Supreme(Telangana) 1233 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA
ORDER : SUREPALLI NANDA, J. Heard Sri Alladi Ravinder, learned Senior Counsel, representing Sri M. Mallesham, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Smt.
2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 17333 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J
BNS in FIR No.320 of 2025. 8. Counter affidavit is filed by respondent No.2/de-facto complainant. ... That the contents in the FIR are that CC Camera is fixed towards the complainant’s bathroom (accused Nos.2’s) and pictures of complainant and her daughter were captured and that on 22.03.2025 at night hours, when she was going to the bathroom, pictures were captured on the mobile phone from the bedroom
2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 18367 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J
declaring the inaction of the respondents as arbitrary for not granting affiliation to an educational institution for the academic year 2025 ... ORDER: Heard Sri A.Bhuvan Sunder Reddy, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Sri Malipeddi Srinivas Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Osmania University appearing on behalf of the ten (10) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and duly communicate the decision on the petitioners’ representations dated 09.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 to the petitio....
2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 18058 • India - IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J
The petitioner through I .A.No.01 of 2025 sought permission of this Court to make submissions as party-in- person and the same had been ordered, accordingly as prayed for.
2025 Supreme(Online)(TEL) 223 • India - High Court of Telangana
M.G.PRIYADARSINI, J
Surepalli Prashanth, Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State and perused the record. 5.
Filter by Legal Phrase
