APHC010026642026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 1711/2026 Between: 1.KUNCHALA HANUMANTHA RAO, S/O.ANJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O.MARRIPALEM VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, AT ONGOLE. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHIMAKURTHY POLICE STATION, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. KUNCHALA HARITHA SUNITHA, W/O.HANUMANTHA RAO, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O.MARRIPALEM VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. TANNERU SRINU, S/O.VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O.MARRIPALEM VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 7. TANNERU SURESH, , S/O.VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O.MARRIPALEM VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2 8. TANNERU SUDHAKAR, S/O.VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O.MARRIPALEM VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 9. TANNERU SOWBHAGYAM, , W/O.VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O.MARRIPALEM VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 10.KUNCHALA BRAHMAIAH, S/O.VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, PULIKONDA VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHY MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.BOLLA VENKATA RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “… to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Authorities more particularly the Respondent No 4 in not filing Charge Sheet by conducting investigation in Crime No 60/2025 of Chimakurthy Police Station Prakasam District and even not arresting the Respondents 5 to 10 who are the Accused in said Crime as arbitrary illegal unconstitutional contrary to the provisions of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 and to pass …” 2. Sri B.V.Rama Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the complaint lodged by the Petitioner was registered as Crime No.60 of 2025 at Chimakurthy Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 364, 307, and 378 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is contended 3 that the investigation is not being carried out in accordance with law and is lacking in fairness, transparency, and effectiveness. 3. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, upon instructions, submits that the investigation is in progress and, thus far, four witnesses have been examined. He further submits that certain other material witnesses remain to be examined and the investigation is presently at a crucial stage. 4. Be that as it may, it is incumbent upon Respondent No.4, the Investigating Officer, to conduct the investigation in a fair, transparent, and effective manner and to bring the same to its logical conclusion in accordance with the procedure established by law. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to Respondent No.4 to complete the investigation and place the final report before the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate. Prior to the filing of such report, Respondent No.3, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ongole, is directed to supervise the investigation being conducted by Respondent No.4. 6. With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dated:28.01.2026 4 VTS