THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.5894 of 2010 Date:21.07.2010 Between: N.P. Naidu. ..... Petitioner AND The Station House Officer, Chodavaram, and others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. C. Raghu Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 5: Assistant Government Pleader for Home Counsel for Respondent No.2: Mr. T. Nagarjuna Reddy Counsel for Respondent Nos.3 and 4: None appeared The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to direct respondent No.1 to register a criminal case against respondent Nos.2 to 4. The petitioner also sought for a direction to respondent No.5 to initiate enquiry into the incident which occurred on 05.03.2010 and also to initiate disciplinary action against respondent Nos.2 to 4. On 15.03.2010, this Court considering the severity of the allegations contained in the affidavit passed the following order: “It is yet another case of alleged harassment by police of an innocent person after his acquittal in a criminal case. The petitioner is a practicing lawyer, who defended the accused by name Korukonda Narayana Rao (hereinafter referred to as “the victim”). According to the petitioner, after the victim was acquitted of Sessions Case No.71 of 2009 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Chodavaram, he was forcibly taken away by a Constable of Chodavaram Police Station and later the petitioner was informed that the victim was brutally beaten by respondent No.2, the Inspector of Police, Chodavaram and thrown in the bushes near bus complex of Chodavaram. The petitioner claimed to have inspected the place, where the victim was lying on the road between Chodavaram Police Station and Court, and the mob of people standing by the side of the victim informed the petitioner that he was beaten by respondent No.2. The petitioner also averred that this incident was brought to the notice of the Assistant Sessions Judge, who is stated to have telephoned respondent No.1 and asked him to register a case, and that the media has also arrived at the scene and recorded the events through video. The petitioner further alleged that on 06.03.2010, he made a complaint to respondent No.5 and his grievance is that no action has been taken so far by respondent No.5 and no crime has been registered. If the allegations contained in the affidavit bear truth, serious action is required to be taken against the police officer, who is responsible for the above incident. Respondent No.5 shall submit his report on the action taken by him on the complaint given by the petitioner and if no action is taken so far, the reasons therefor.” On the direction of this Court, respondent No.5 submitted a report, dated 24.04.2010, wherein it is stated that the victim – K. Narayana Rao has refused to give a report in writing and therefore, basing on the statements given to the S.D.P.O., Anakapalli at the time of enquiry, a suo motu case was registered by respondent No.1 as Crime No.50 of 2010 under Sections 342, 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C. of Chodavaram Police Station. Respondent No.5 also filed proceedings in R.O.O. No.109/2010 of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Visakhapatnam, placing respondent No.2 under suspension. It is represented by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home that the said suspension order is still in force and charge sheet in the crime is not yet filed. In the light of the above facts, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.5 to monitor the criminal case and ensure that appropriate report/charge sheet is filed at the earliest. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.7607 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 21st July, 2010 GHN