IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF JULY, TWO THOUSAND NINE ONLY WRIT PETITION No.12541 of 2009 Between: M.Hari Narayana @ Hari Babu. … Petitioner And: The State of A.P., reptd., by its Superintendent of Police, Kadapa District, Kadapa, and seven others. … Respondents. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri. Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Home for R.1 to R.4. None for R.5 to R.8. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.2 in completing investigation and not filing charge sheet in Crime No.358 of 2008 registered for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 341, 324 and 506 IPC read with Section 149 IPC, under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, as arbitrary, illegal and colourable exercise of power, apart from being contrary to the procedure envisaged under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, and under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Heard Sri V.R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents 1 to 4. The grievance of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that the criminal case registered on the complaint of the petitioner is not being properly investigated into and charge sheet is not being filed, which is contrary to the statutory mandate under the provisions of the said Act and the Rules. Certain allegations of malafides were made against respondent No.3, retired Deputy Superintendent of Police. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2, who is the investigating officer, he stated that investigation was earlier entrusted to respondent No.3 and that he examined as many as 18 witnesses before he retired from service. He further stated that, subsequently, he was entrusted with the investigation of the said case, which revealed that PWs.1 to 7 supported the case of the prosecution, while PWs.8 to 15, who are the independent witnesses, have given the opposite version, and PWs.16 to 18 spoke in support of the version of the accused; that in view of the contradictory versions, he filed a memo before the I Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Cuddapah, to permit him to send the witnesses to Polygraph test before the Director of Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderabad, to ascertain the truth or otherwise of their versions; and that, in the meantime, respondents 5 to 8, who are the accused in the said crime, filed Criminal Petition No.4289 of 2009 and obtained order of stay from this Court. Respondent No.2 assured that investigation will be completed in an impartial manner and the final report will be filed before the competent Court at the earliest. Having regard to the assurance given by respondent No.2 that he will complete the investigation and file final report before the jurisdictional Magistrate, I find it not necessary to go into the various allegations made by the petitioner against the alleged bias being shown by the Police in favour of the accused. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.2 to complete the investigation and file appropriate report within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date: 13-7-2009 MNR