APHC010356272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) \ FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 17955 OF 2025 Between: Gollapally Murali Mohan Reddy, S/o. Krishna Reddy, Age about 46 years, Occ Farmer, R/o.6-128, Aravind Colony, Shamshabad, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Home, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Director General of Police, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Mangalagiri, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh-522 502. 3. The Special Investigation Team S I T, Rep. by its Investigation Officer- cum- Additional Superintendent of Police, Camp at Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order, orders or directions more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus - -■.9, declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in torturing the petitioner like an accused in heinous manner instead of treating him as a witness by using filthy language and also threatening him with dire consequences besides insisting him to depose statement as per his wish without recording petitioner's original statement and also the action of the 3rd respondent in not allowing his advocate to be present with him during investigation process in Crime No.21 of 2024 U/Sec.409. 420, 120 (B) R/w. 34 and 37 IPC, Sec.7. 7A, 8. 13(1), (b), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act-1988 of CID PS, Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh as illegal, arbitrary, discriminative, abuse of process of law, colorable exercise of powers, besides violative of Arts.14, 16, 19, 20 (3) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the 3rd respondent Investigation Officer to allow the petitioner to be present for investigation scheduled on 16-06-2025 along with his Advocate besides directing the 3rd respondent Investigation Officer to video graph the investigation proceedings and also recording of the statement of the petitioner in the presence of his Advocate whenever he is investigation IV. called for lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct fhe 3rd respondent Investigation Officer to allow the petitioner to be present for investigation scheduled on 16-06-2025 along with his Advocate besides directing the 3rd respondent Investigation Officer to videograph the investigation proceedings and also recording of the statement of the petitioner in the presence of his Advocate whenever he is called for investigation Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PEETA RAMAN Counsel for the Respondents No 1 FOR CID The Court made the following order: to 3: SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ■’if- T APHC010356272025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE honourable DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 17955/2025 [3396] Between: 1.GOLLAPALLY MURALI MOHAN REDDY, S/0. KRISHNA REDDY, AGEABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC FARMER, R/0.6-128, ARAVIND COLONY, SHAMSHABAD, RANGA REDDY DISTRICT, TELANGANA. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, DEPARTMENT OF HOME PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA MANGALAGlRi, KRISHNA DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS PRADESH PRADESH-522 502. 3.THE SPECIAL INVESTIGATION TEAM S I T, REP. BY ITS investigation OFFICER-GUM- ADDITIONAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CAMP AT VIJAYAWADA, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): ANDHRA Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.PEETA RAMAN Counsel foJ" Respondent(S): 1.SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CID The Court made the following: ORDER;, This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: a Writ of Mandamus ij declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in torturing the petitioner like an accused in heinous manner instead of treating him as a witness by using filthy language and also ii) threatening him with dire consequences besides insisting him to depose statement as per his wish without recording petitioner's original statement and also Hi) 2 the action of the 3rd respondent in not allowing his advocate to present with him during investigation process in Crime No.21 of 2024 U/Sec.409, 420, 120 (B) R/w. 34 and 37 IPC, Sec. 7, 7A, 8, 13(1), (b), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act- 1988 of CID PS, Mangalagiri, Andhra Pradesh as illegal, arbitrary, discriminative, abuse of process of law, colorable exercise of powers, besides violative of Arts. 14, 16, 19, 20 (3) and 21 of the Constitution of India and Iv) consequently, direct the 3rd respondent Investigation Officer to allow the petitioner to be present for investigation scheduled on 16-06-2025 along with his Advocate besides directing the 3rd respondent Investigation proceedings and also recording of the petitioner In the presence of his Advocate whenever he is called for investigation. ” Sri Peeta Raman, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, in connection with Crime No.21 of 2024 on the file of C.I.D Police Station, Mangalagiri, the Petitioner may be examined by the Respondents, whenever he is called for investigation, in the presence of an Advocate of his choice, and the same may be recorded through audio-video electronic means. Ms.A.Jayanthi, learned Government Pleader for Home would submit that the investigation of the Petitioner may be held within the visible sight of his Advocate. Learned Government Pleader would submit that the Court pass appropriate orders. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The^ Petitioner is directed to appear before the Respondent - Police, whenever he is called for investigation and the Petitioner is entitled to be accompanied by an Advocate of his choice, subject to the condition that the said Advocate shall be at a distance of minimum 15 feet away from the place of investigation. The Advocate shall maintain decency and decorum and shall be Officer to video graph the investigation statement of the 2. 3. may V 3 not interfere with the investigation. The proceedings shall be videographed. There shall be no order as to costs As a sequel thereto miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand Sd/- G. HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR closed. 3 //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Department of Home, State of Andhra 1. The Principal Secretary Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Andhra Pradesh Government of Andhra Pradesh, 2. The Director General of Police Mangalagiri, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh-522 502. Additional Superintendent of Police, S I T. Camp at Vijayawada, Andhra 3. The Investigation Officer-cum- Special Investigation Team Pradesh. 4. One CC to SRI PEETA RAMAN Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCS ot SPL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR CID, High Court of Andhra Pradesh 6. Two CD Copies gsg •a HIGH COURT DATED: 18/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 17955 OF 2025 ^ 27 0CT2K5 ^$ DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS