SHAIK ABDULLA SHAREEF Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not transferring the investigation in Crime No.162 of 2008 on the file of respondent No.5 Police Station to C.B.C.I.D. as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners sought for a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to transfer the investigation in the said Crime to C.B.C.I.D.

(2.) I have heard Sri P. Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.1 to 5. No one appeared for respondent No.6 at the hearing.

(3.) The petitioners are residents of Nandyal town. There were civil disputes between the petitioners and their neighbour-Dr.S.Intiyaj Ahmed. According to the petitioners, the Sub-Inspectors of I Town Police Station, Nandyal, Bandi Atmakur Police Station and Head Constable of I Town Police Station, Nandyal, along with two constables, came to their house in the night of 11.02.2007 at around 2.00 a.m., forcibly took away petitioner No.1 to D.S.P. Bungalow at Nandyal, severely beat and implicated him in a case registered on the purported report lodged by the said Dr.S.Intiyaj Ahmed. On the alleged illegal detention and torture, petitioner No.1 filed a private complaint against the said Dr.Intiaj Ahmed and Police Officers. After recording the statements of petitioner No.1 and five other witnesses, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of the case, for the offences under Sections 341, 326, 324, 329, 120- B read with Section 149 I.P.C. against the said persons as PRC No.130 of 2007 and the same is pending. The petitioners specifically pleaded that the present D.S.P., Dhone-respondent No.4, who worked as Sub-Inspector and Circle Inspector in Nandyal town for about ten years, was well acquainted with Dr.S.Intiyaj Ahmed, who is A.1 in the above PRC; that when the petitioners did not agree for a compromise in the said PRC., all the accused approached respondent No.4; and that, on his directions, the Police Officers selected one person, by name, Yerukula Koneti Nageswara Rao-respondent No.6 and got a private complaint filed before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Banaganapalle, with the allegations that respondent No.6 has obtained hand loan from the petitioners on 17.08.2008, when the petitioners allegedly visited the house of respondent No.6 and demanded the said amount, he was unable to pay the same, and, hence, the petitioners allegedly abused respondent No.6 by caste name by dragging him out of his house. The Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Banaganapalle, before whom the private complaint was filed by respondent No.6, has referred the said complaint to the Banaganapalle Police Station, within the jurisdiction of Dhone Sub-Division. The Banaganapalle Police, under the alleged directions of respondent No.4, registered Crime No.162 of 2008 for the offences under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The petitioners pleaded that they had no acquaintance whatsoever with respondent No.6, who is a resident of Banaganapalle, and alleged that registration of Crime No.162 of 2008 is the handiwork of the accused in PRC No.130 of 2007 in collaboration with respondent No.4. The petitioners, therefore, apprehended that investigation by respondent No.4 would cause harm to their interests as the said respondent is biased towards the accused in the said PRC.