The court ordered the registration of a criminal case against Konda Surekha and mandated that a notice be served to her on or before 21 August 2025.
Published Aug 02, 2025 | 6:42 PM ⚊ Updated Aug 02, 2025 | 7:37 PM
Telangana minister Konda Surekha and BRS Working President KTR.
Synopsis: Minister Surekha had held KTR responsible for the divorce of Tollywood actors Naga Chaitanya and Samantha Ruth Prabhu, besides accusing him of involvement in illegal activities like phone tapping and drug addiction.
In a major legal setback for Telangana Forest and Environment Minister Konda Surekha, the Nampally City Civil Court has directed the Hyderabad police to register a criminal defamation case against her.
The court on Saturday, 2 August, gave the direction in response to a complaint filed by Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) Working President and former minister KT Rama Rao.
The court’s ruling marked a significant development in the high-profile defamation suit.
The Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nampally Court, after reviewing preliminary evidence submitted by KTR, found sufficient grounds to proceed under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which addresses criminal defamation, in conjunction with procedural provisions under BNSS Sections 222 and 223.
The court ordered the registration of a criminal case against Surekha and mandated that a notice be served to her on or before 21 August 2025.
The court’s decision was based on its assessment that Surekha’s 2 October 2024 statements, accusing KTR of causing the divorce of Tollywood actors Naga Chaitanya and Samantha Ruth Prabhu, constituted a prima facie case of defamation.
These remarks, which also included claims of KTR’s involvement in illegal activities like phone tapping and drug addiction, were deemed baseless and damaging by KTR’s legal team.
Surekha’s counsel raised objections, arguing that KTR’s complaint was speculative and outside the court’s jurisdiction. However, the court dismissed these contentions, citing a prior High Court direction (Criminal Petition No. 5670/2024) that affirmed the Nampally court’s authority to admit the complaint.
The court also addressed objections regarding the admissibility of a pen drive submitted as evidence by KTR. Surekha’s team argued that a Section 65-B certificate under the Indian Evidence Act was required for electronic evidence.
The court ruled that this requirement was premature at the current stage and could be addressed during the trial’s evidence phase, ensuring that the electronic material would be evaluated per legal procedures.
The court further noted that there was no evidence to suggest Surekha’s controversial statements had appeared in the media before her public remarks. This finding strengthened KTR’s argument that the statements were directly attributable to Surekha and made with the intent to defame him.
The court’s order was supported by sworn statements from five witnesses, including BRS leaders Balka Suman, Satyavathi Rathod, Tula Uma, and Dasoju Sravan, who corroborated KTR’s claims of reputational harm. KTR’s counsel, Advocate Siddharth Pogula, presented newspaper clippings, video recordings, and hyperlinks to news reports, demonstrating the defamatory nature of Surekha’s allegations.
The court concluded that the evidence and testimonies established a prima facie case of a punishable offense under the BNS provisions.
KTR filed the defamation suit on 10 October 2024, after Surekha failed to respond to a legal notice demanding a public apology. The court’s earlier order on 25 October 2024 had restrained Surekha from making further defamatory remarks and mandated the removal of her statements from media platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and Google.
Responding to the development, Surekha said cases and conflicts were not new to her, and that her life has been a struggle.
“It is quite common for the courts to take cognizance in any case. This happened two days ago. However, seeing the enthusiasm of some journalist friends and media colleagues, who are writing sensational headlines like ‘Konda Surekha Case Creates a Stir’ or ‘Big Breaking News’, I feel both surprised and amused,” she said.
“The excitement surrounding the name Konda Surekha is such that some reporters are writing in the media and on social media as though the court has delivered a judgment in my case. I leave this to their wisdom. I will say only one thing: the law will take its own course,” she added.
KTR, meanwhile, said he was only halfway through a long battle.
“Truth will always come out. If not immediately, eventually!,” he wrote on X. “Power doesn’t absolve you of your nonsensical tirades and abuse of character. Power doesn’t give you the right to drag people’s lives through the filth! Being in Power is an opportunity to serve the public…not to rumour monger and sling dirt on opponents. I hope this serves as a lesson to everyone who thinks they can get away with spewing venom in the name of politics,” he added.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
