APHC010109732020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 6726/2020 Between: 1. MUKKALA BAJI,, AGED 30 YEARS, OCC. ADVOCATE, C/O MUKKALA BABU RAO, FLAT NO.22B, SIVA SAI DEVELOPERS VENCHERS, NEAR SEETHARAMAPURAM KOSTAL, MADDIPADU, MADDIPADU, PRASAKAM DIST, ANDHRA PRADESH-523211. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY IT'S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HOME DEPT) SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AT AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MANGALAGIRI, ANDHRA PRADESH 522502. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DIST AT ONGOLE. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MADDIPADU, PRAKASAM DIST. 5. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, DEPARTMENT OF CID, C/O DGP OFFICE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a issue a Writ Order or direction, particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus directing the respondents no 2 to hand over the case investigation to an indipendent investigation agencey i.e CBCID ( Crime Branch- Crime Investigation Department) for re-investigation of the Crime No 170 of 2018 pending before Maddipadu Police, Ongole, Prakasam Dist, as the respondent No.4 neither conduted fair and impartial 2 investigation nor acted in accordance of law and the action of respondents as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also Article 14 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent no 4 to serve the copy of notice along with copy of final report to the petitioner.” 2. Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that police after due investigation referred the case as false. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedies before appropriate forum in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:11.09.2025 ASR 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.6726 of 2020 Dt.11.09.2025 Asr