High Court of Andhra Pradesh Orders
Interim orders, bail orders, stay orders, and daily directions from the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. AI-powered summaries for quick understanding.
AP HC Schedules Dismissal in Unknown vs High Court of Andhra Pradesh
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh has noted the absence of representation for the petitioner and has scheduled the matter for dismissal on March 3, 2026. The respondents' counsel has requested additional time, but the court is moving forward with the dismissal process.
AP HC Adjourns Hearing in Crl.R.C.No.2480 of 2017
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh has adjourned the case for three weeks at the request of the revision petitioner's counsel. This order allows for additional time before the matter is heard again.
AP HC Adjourns Hearing in WP/1684/2013 to 24 February 2026
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh has adjourned the hearing of W.P.No.1684 of 2013 due to the absence of representation for the petitioner. The matter is scheduled to be posted again on 24 February 2026.
AP HC Grants Interim Bail to M. Jayaramaiah for Medical Treatment
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh granted interim bail to M. Jayaramaiah for 64 days due to his serious health issues, allowing him to receive medical treatment. The court considered the petitioner's age and medical condition, including a diagnosis of cancer and other health complications.
AP HC Suspends Sentence for P. Nagendra Reddy in POCSO Case Pending Appeal
The High Court of Andhra Pradesh has suspended the sentence of imprisonment for the petitioner, Sri P. Nagendra Reddy, pending the appeal against his conviction under the POCSO Act and IPC. The court imposed conditions to ensure the safety of the victim and her family during this period.
APHC Directs Police to Refrain from Interfering in Civil Dispute in Chitte Pratap Reddy vs State
The Andhra Pradesh High Court directed the police not to interfere in a civil dispute between the petitioners and private respondents, while allowing the police to proceed with a separate narcotics case against one of the petitioners. The court emphasized that police actions should not be used to intimidate the petitioners in civil matters.