THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.31096 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed with the prayer, which reads as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioner herein prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents herein particularly respondent Nos.3 and 4 herein in not taking any action against the 5th respondent herein and declare the action of the 5th respondent herein in demanding petitioner to appear in place of Accused No.26 in SCSTSC No.50 of 2008 on the file of Hon’ble Special Judge for SC, ST Atrocities Case – cum – VI Additional District Judge, Kurnool, Kurnool District, as illegal, high handed and violative of his fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct respondents 3 and 4 herein to take necessary action against the 5th respondent herein and protect his life.” A case in Crime No.2 of 2004 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 353, 332, 506 IPC read with 149 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, against 29 accused, on the file of Kosigi Police Station. Except A.26, all the accused were surrendered and were also enlarged on bail. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Adoni. The same was taken on file vide PRC.No.33 of 2007 and was committed to the Court of Session, which in turn, forwarded the same to the Court of Special Judge for SC, ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases – cum – VI Additional District Judge, Kurnool, which assigned it with SCST.SC.No.50 of 2008 and is pending trial. Now, it is posted to 05.01.2011 for trial. Subsequently, as A.26 in the said case did not appear, NBWs were issued against him. Consequently, the fifth respondent – Station House Officer, Kosigi Village and Mandal, Kurnool, arrested the petitioner herein and thereafter, he was released. In this writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that though no case is registered against him, he was arrested and produced before the Court below as if he is Watchman Govindu, who is arrayed as A.26 in the aforesaid case. On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents that the accused i.e. A.1 to A.25 have identified and stated that Watchman Govindu and the petitioner, by name, Durnigani Govindu, is one and the same and that the enquiries made in the village revealed that Watchman Govindu and the petitioner is one and the same. As much as the matter is pending trial, this Court cannot examine the plea of the petitioner at this stage. If the petitioner believes that he is not Watchman Govindu, who is A.26 in SCST.SC.No.50 of 2008, it is open for him to file appropriate application before the Court below seeking to discharge him as accused from the aforesaid case. But, when the matter is pending trial and when it is the case of the respondents that Watchman Govindu and the petitioner, by name, Durnigani Govindu is one and the same, no relief can be granted in favour the petitioner at this stage. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 20th DECEMBER, 2010. kvni