Jubilee Hills blasting case: Telangana HC closes PIL after finding operations lawful

A division bench of Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G M Mohiuddin heard extensive arguments and reviewed an affidavit from the Hyderabad police commissioner, following which Chief Justice Singh said, “This court is of the view that the impugned exercise of blasting was carried out after statutory compliance on behalf of the unofficial respondent and upon permission granted by the Commissioner of Police Hyderabad in accordance with law.”

The legal proceedings focused on a complex interplay between two key statutes: the central government’s Explosives Act of 1884 and the state’s Hyderabad City Police Act. The counsel for the petitioners argued that the commissioner lacked the authority to grant blasting permissions, which are strictly governed by the Explosives Act and its licensing bodies, the Petroleum and Explosive Safety Organization (PESO), and the Chief Controller of Explosives (CCOE).

However, Additional Advocate General Imran Khan, representing the police commissioner and other official respondents, clarified the legal position. He submitted that while the Explosives Act governs the manufacture, possession, and transport of explosives, the Hyderabad City Police Act, specifically Section 21(1)F5, empowers the commissioner to regulate activities, including blasting, that could cause “inconvenience, delay, danger, or damage to the residents”. The commissioner’s role, therefore, is not to supplant the explosives authority but to conduct a ground-level feasibility and safety check, Khan submitted.

The affidavit filed by the police commissioner, cited in court, itemised a series of statutory licenses, work orders, and ground inquiry reports from local police officials, including the deputy commissioner of police, West Zone, and the assistant commissioner of police, Jubilee Hills. The document categorically stated that permission was granted only after thorough verification of these materials. The court also noted that the blasting operations had already been completed as of June 3, 2025, and no further permissions for blasting in the area have been granted.

The petitions were accordingly closed.

From the homepage

‘Time to decriminalise all this’: Supreme Court signals rethink on criminal defamation

‘Unfortunate’: SC slams reports suggesting ‘pilot error’ led to Air India crash, issues notice on plea seeking independent probe

As GST 2.0 kicks in: what changes for consumers and industry