IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THIS THE 24th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010 WRIT PETITION No.3547 of 2006 Between S.Venkata Subbaiah Naidu …PETITIONER(S) A N D The State of A.P. rep by Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Saifabad, Hyderabad and others …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3547 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioner submitted a complaint dated 27.09.2005 before the Station House officer, Rajampet Police Station, alleging that one Mallela Surendra son of Subbarayudu and nine others of Rajampet Town have attacked him and his family members with iron rods, spears, axes etc., while they were returning to the house. Bleeding injuries are said to have been caused in an attempt to kill them. Crime No.88 of 2005 of Rajampet Police Station was registered under Sections 147 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as – ‘I.P.C.’), and the investigation was taken up. The petitioner feels aggrieved by the lines on which the investigation was taken up and contends that a crime under Section 307 of I.P.C. ought to have been registered. The Inspector of Police i.e. the 3rd respondent herein has filed a counter affidavit wherein it is stated that soon after a complaint was received, a case in a Crime No.88 of 2005 on the file of the Rajampet Police Station was registered and investigation was taken up. According to him, the evidence recorded by them established the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 324 r/w 149 of the I.P.C. and there are no ingredients that constitute an offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home. The petitioner might have alleged certain acts constituting crimes against some accused. Ultimately, it is for the investigating agency to satisfy itself as to whether any crime referable to a particular provision of law was committed. In case the petitioner feels aggrieved by the charge sheet or the final report to be submitted by the police, he has option to file a protest petition under the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The 3rd respondent categorically stated that they would charge the accused with the crimes under the relevant provisions of law duly taking into account the extent of involvement by the accused. Therefore, no illegality can be said to have been committed by the respondents. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 24th February 2010 CVRK