The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.3207 of 2010 Dated 23rd March, 2010 Between: Navyasri.K. …Petitioner And 1.The Commissioner of Police, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad and another. …Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Mrs.Ambika Rani for Mr.M.Kalyana Ramakrishna Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Home The Court made the following: Order: This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondents, in considering the petitioner’s representation, dated 02-02-2010, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner also sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to transfer Crime No.36 of 2010 pending before respondent No.2 to C.B.C.I.D., Lakdi-ka-pool, Hyderabad. The petitioner alleged that she was forcibly kidnapped and raped by one P.Balakrishna, when she was a minor, at Mydukur in Kadapa District; that thereafter, she was brought to Hyderabad and kept in confinement at Medchal for three days and in a flat at Amberpet for 19 days, during which period the said person used to commit rape on her every day. The petitioner further stated that the Police of Amberpet Police Station prepared a Telugu written complaint on which the petitioner was made to sign and that a case was registered, on the basis of the said statement, as Crime No.36 of 2010 on 28th January, 2010 for offences under Sections 498-A, 376, and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner apprehends that as there is no progress in the investigation, she may not get proper justice and therefore, she made a representation to respondent No.1- Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, on 02-02-2010 with a request to transfer the file to Crime Branch of CID. Though no counter-affidavit is filed, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home furnished a copy of written instructions submitted by respondent No.2- Inspector of Police, Amberpet Police Station, Hyderabad, wherein it is inter alia stated that the investigation done so far revealed that the incidents of rape and cheating occurred at Badwel and Mydukur while the petitioner was a student; that after completion of her minority, the petitioner came along with the accused from Badwel to Hyderabad and stayed with him for a period of 3 days at Medchal and for a period of 19 days at Amberpet and that therefore, respondent No.2 addressed a letter to respondent No.1 on 10-02-2010 with a request to transfer the CD file in the abovesaid Crime to Badwel Police Station of Kadapa District. At the hearing, Smt.Ambica Rani, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that as the petitioner is presently staying in Hyderabad with her maternal uncle, transfer of the case for investigation to Badwel will cause prejudice to her interests and that the petitioner also apprehends danger at the hands of the accused, if she visits Badwel in connection with the investigation in the abovesaid Crime. I find force in the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner. Even taking the allegations made by the petitioner on their face value, the alleged offence appears to be continuous one, which evidently occurred both at Badwel and also at Hyderabad. Therefore, I find no justification for respondent No.2 to propose transfer of the case. As the petitioner is stated to be presently residing in Hyderabad and considerable part of the offence has been allegedly committed in Hyderabad, it is appropriate that respondent No.2 retains the case for the purpose of investigation and filing appropriate report before the jurisdictional Magistrate on completion of investigation. It is note worthy that one of the petitioner’s grievances is that despite the detailed representation made by her on 25-01-2010 to the Home Minister, a fresh complaint was prepared in Telugu by respondent No.2 and she was made to sign the same, the contents of which are stated to be at variance with those contained in her representation, dated 25-01-2010. In the light of these allegations, respondent No.2 is directed to take into consideration the earliest version of the petitioner and investigate into her complaint accordingly. If on the basis of such investigation, respondent No.2 is satisfied that the Crime requires to be altered, he shall do so accordingly. Respondent No.2 is further directed to complete the investigation and file appropriate chargesheet/final report before the jurisdictional Magistrate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.4224 of 2010, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. _____________________ C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J Dated 23rd March, 2010 lur