IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO : 887 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 05/08/2008 in WP NO : 16941 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: P. Radha Rani, W/o. Perla Nagakumar Reddy, R/o. H.No. 1-1181-3, Yerramukkhapally, Kadapa - 002. ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Kadapa, Kadapa District. 2 Inspector of Police, Yerraguntla P.S. Kadapa District. 3 Sub-Inspector of Police, Yerraguntla P.S. Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant:M/S INDUS LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO : 887 of 2008 JUDGMENT: (Per Sri Justice B Prakash Rao) Heard learned counsel for both sides and at their request the appeal itself is taken up for disposal at the admission stage. The appellant herein is the unsuccessful writ petition, who sought for a writ of mandamus seeking a direction to declare the action on the part of the respondent herein in investigating the crime No. 120 of 2007 dated 16.8.2007 on the ﬁle of Yerraguntla police sation, Kadapa as illegal. The main ground on which the case of the appellant rests is to the aﬀect that the entire case has already been entrusted to CBCID, therefore the question of any investigation by the respondents herein, does not arise and the same is without jurisdiction. The petitioner contends that the oﬃcials of respondents have made a statement before the A.P. State Human Rights Commission where it was stated that the case is being investigated by local police as well as it is referred to the CBCID on the request of the petitioner. Therefore the complaint of the petitioner/appellant is that let the investigation be conducted by the CBCID and not by the local police/respondents herein. The learned Single Judge having found that the appellant totally failed to substantiate his claim to the eﬀect that any such entrustment was made to CBCID, did not ﬁnd favour with the petitioner and dismissed the writ petition. Having heard the learned counsel on either side and on perusal of the material and especially taking into consideration the counter aﬃdavit ﬁled by Mr B Venkata Siva Reddy, Inspector of Police, Yerraguntla circle, Kadapa district in the present appeal, where it is stated that there is no such entrustment of the matter to CBCID and in fact the entire investigation is taken up by the local police and the same is very much in progress. Any such entrustment can necessarily be done only by following the due procedure and passing of appropriate orders by the authorities concerned. In the present case, since no such material is put- forth, we are not convinced with the contention of the appellant that the investigation of the subject case was entrusted to CBCID. In the result, we do not ﬁnd any merits in the appeal, warranting interference. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs. _______________ B.PRAKASH RAO,J _______________ R. KANTHA RAO,J DATE:22.9.2008 Tvk THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT APPEAL NO : 887 of 2008 Date: 22.9.2008