GEDDAM BULLAYYA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
LAWS(APH)-2022-3-51
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on March 23,2022

Geddam Bullayya Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus against respondent Nos.3 and 4, who according to the petitioner have not conducted a free and fair investigation into Crime No.266 of 2021 of Tallapudi Police Station, and to handover the case to an independent agency i.e., the CBCID for investigation into the matter.
(2.) This Court has heard Sri Jada Sravan Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Home appears for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and the learned standing counsel for the 5th respondent-CID department.
(3.) The petitioner, who is the father of the deceased and is aggrieved by the investigation conducted in Crime No.266 of 2021 by the 4th respondent, has filed the present Writ Petition. The petitioner's son was found dead in a field. Initially an FIR was registered under Sec. 174 of Cr.P.C., on 6/10/2021. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the death of the petitioner's son is mysterious. He was found dead in a banana plantation without any clothes on his body in the land belonging to one Kommaraju Muthyalarao, who has taken the land on lease. There were some issues between the deceased and the accused and the deceased was working as a farm labour. The grievance of the petitioner is that the deceased has number of injury marks on his dead body and yet the police were satisfied with the classification of death as 'suicide' with the consumption of a poison lethal substance called "permethrin". Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that if a poisonous substance like "permethrin" is consumed it will leave marks all over the mouth, throat, intestine etc., and without checking the same, the death was classified only as suicide. He also points out that in view of the slow phase of investigation and the failure of the respondents to properly conduct investigation they had filed W.P.No.285925 of 2021 wherein a learned single Judge by an order dtd. 10/12/2020 directing the police to complete the investigation within one month. It is also stated in the said order that if the investigation could not be completed within the time, the petitioner is free to take action as required under law. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the progress was slow and not proper he filed a private complaint under Sec. 200 Cr.P.C., before the designated Court i.e., VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-special Court for Trial of Cases under SC's and ST's (POA) Act 1989 at Eluru, which after considering the evidence and documents, passed an order directing the SHO, Tallapudi Police Station to register the FIR under appropriate provisions and for investigation of the case. Learned counsel submits that thereafter the Sec. in the FIR were altered from Sec. 174 Cr.P.C., into a case under Ss. 302, 201 r/w 34 IPC and Sec. 3(2)(v) of SCs, STs POA Act (Amended Act 2015) (in short "SCs and STs (POA)Act"). Even thereafter, it is submitted that there is no clear progress in the investigation of the crime. Learned counsel for the petitioner argues vehemently that since political big wigs are involved in the crime the police are slowing down the investigation and have not actually zeroed in on the accused or nor have taken any concrete steps so far. Learned counsel also filed additional material papers which include some close up photographs of the dead body to argue that the doctors did not conduct a proper postmortem etc. It is submitted that even after the case is registered under Ss. 302, 201 r/w 34 IPC and Sec. 3(2)(v) of SCs and STs (POA) Act the respondent police have not taken the action that is necessary nor discharged their duties for a fair investigation particularly under Sec. 302 IPC. Therefore, he submits that this is a fit case in which the investigation should be handed over to CBCID. He relies upon the case law that is filed along with Writ Petition to argue that this is a fit case in which the Court should follow the earlier judgments and direct the investigation by the third party and not by the local police.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.