THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.20116 of 2009 Dated 06th July, 2011 Between: Sri V.N.Sunanda Reddy …Petitioner And Superintendent of Police, Sangareddy, Medak District and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri A.Hanumantha Reddy Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2: AGP for Home The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to direct the respondents not to arrest the petitioner till completion of investigation and filing of a charge sheet. I have heard Sri A.Hanumantha Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home representing the respondents. The petitioner is the authorised signatory of M/s.S.S.Organics Limited (for short ‘the Company’). Evidently, an order determining the Company’s liability for payment of the amount under the provisions of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 was passed against it. Crime No.282 of 2008 on the file of the Sadasivapet Police Station, for the offences under Sections 406 and 409 IPC, was registered against the petitioner and another on 11.12.2008. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. This Court by order, dated 25.09.2009, granted stay of investigation. However, the said order was modified by this Court by order, dated 23.04.2010, permitting the respondents to investigate into the crime. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.2, it is averred that following registration of the case, investigation was commenced, during which, LWs.2 to 5 were examined and their statements were recorded and that during the investigation, it was revealed that the petitioner has misappropriated the provident funds belonging to the employees of the Company for the period 2004 to 2006 to a tune of Rs.2,73,183/- and did not deposit the same into the accounts of the employees. It is further stated that A2, one B.Subbareddy, has also misappropriated the funds of the Company for the period 2006 to 2008 to the tune of Rs.3,35,880/- and failed to deposit the same into the employees’ accounts. It is also stated that in view of the interim order, dated 25.09.2009, further investigation could not be proceeded with. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accusations against his client are false and if the investigation is completed, the petitioner’s innocence will stand established. Since the writ petition is pending from September, 2009 and an interim order was granted by this Court in favour of the petitioner, it will be appropriate that the petitioner is not arrested till completion of the investigation and filing an appropriate report. However, in the event of filing of charge sheet against the petitioner after completion of the investigation, the respondents shall be free to act in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in dealing with the petitioner. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.26239 of 2009 and W.V.M.P.No.1854 of 2011 are disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 06th July, 2011 VGB