The Telangana High Court has thrown out a petition demanding an FIR against Chief Minister Revanth Reddy for allegedly posting misleading information on Twitter about Osmania University hostel closures in 2023.
Justice B Vijaysen Reddy dismissed the case, deeming it “preposterous” to assume that the CM would personally handle trivial tweets. The Court acknowledged that the notice in question had actually been issued by the Chief Warden of Hostels and Messes and forwarded to the Station House Officer at Osmania University City Police Station.
This ruling came after six students claimed that the police had neglected to file an FIR against Reddy following their complaint. The controversy stemmed from an April protest by Osmania University boarders over water and electricity shortages. The Chief Warden subsequently announced the closure of hostels and messes for the month of May, citing these shortages. This notice, circulated by the Warden, sparked political debates.
The Court heard that CM Reddy had instructed the Osmania University Registrar to issue a show-cause notice to the Chief Warden for spreading “misleading information,” which sowed confusion within the University community. Reddy later shared a similar notice from 2023 about the water and electricity shortage at the University.
The BRS social media convenor, Krishank Manne, countered the CM’s tweet by claiming the notice was not genuine and posted an “original notice” from May 2023. Following this, the Chief Warden filed a police complaint against Manne, who was later arrested and is currently out on bail. Manne allegedly uploaded the 2023 notice, omitting details about the acute shortages.
The State argued that the petitioners’ complaint against the CM was a retaliatory move, knowing full well that a case was already registered against Manne. The Court noted that the notice shared by the CM had not come from his office but was forwarded by the Chief Warden to the police.
The Court concluded that since an investigation was already underway to determine the authenticity of the documents, the petition lacked merit and was dismissed. The petitioners were advised they could pursue other legal remedies.
The petitioners were represented by Advocate M Roopender, and the State was represented by Additional Advocate General T Rajinikanth Reddy.
