IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELVTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 21213 of 2014 BETWEEN Kappara Venkateshwarlu AND ... PETITIONER The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.5 has filed a complaint before the police against the petitioner and one Nageshwara Rao, which was registered as Crime No.76 of 2014 of I Town Police Station, Vijayawada; and that the petitioner was threatened to pay the amount to respondent No.5. Alleging inaction on the part of respondent Nos.3 and 4, the present writ petition is filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the investigation in the same crime is stated to be pending and hence, the petitioner seeks a final report to be filed under Section 174 Cr.P.C.
4. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that on the complaint filed by respondent No.5, dated 22.01.2014, alleging that petitioner and one Nageshwara Rao have deceived the complainant and have received huge amounts from the complainant, investigation was taken up and so far four witnesses have been examined; that both the accused are stated to be absconding and are not available and are not cooperating with the investigating agency.
5. It is obvious from the instructions, aforesaid, that the petitioner and the other accused are allegedly absconding and are not available to the Station House Officer for the purpose of investigation. In view of that, therefore, the question of threatening the petitioner to pay the money to respondent No.5 etc., as alleged, appears highly improbable. So far as the investigation in the crime is concerned, regarding which petitioner has sought relief, in my view, since the investigation has already progressed substantially, interest of justice would be served by directing respondent No.3 to complete the investigation in the said crime and file his final report before the jurisdictional Magistrate expeditiously preferably within two months.
With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J August 12, 2014 LMV