The High Court · 2025

..RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, : I l : l declaring the action of the 3'd respondent in not altering the section from 174 cr-P.c. to sec. 306 rpc basing on the suicidd note and not taking any steps to commence the investigation -basing on the a-llegations leveled in the Suicide Note andadti the Respondent Nos.4 to 6 as Accused; . t. as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 3'd Respwdent to alter the sections frcm 174 Cr.P.C to 306 IPC and add ? the lpspondent Nos.4 to 6 as accused in Crime No.79 of 2016 d1.23.03.2016 on the file Adibatla Police Station, Cyberabad. l.A. NO:1 OF . NO:'19020 OF 201 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2od and 3'd respondents to act upon petitioner's Complaint d1.29.11.2016 forthwith, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI T. RA"TINIKANTH REDDY Counsel forthe Respondents No.1 to 3: SRI G. ANIKETH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME Counsel forthe Respondents: SRI'P. PRABHAKAR RAO SMT. DSV MAHALAKSHMI The Court mada thc.following;.oRDER I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI ORDER: This \Vrit Petition is filed under Article 226 of Consritution of India seeking the followtng relieflsr "... to issue a writ orider or direction more panicularly one in the nature of Vrit of }vlandamrs, I 0 declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not altering the Section from L74 G.P.C to Sec. 306 IPC basing on the suicide note and not taking any sreps ro commence the investigation basing on the allegations levelled in the Suicide Note and add the Respondent Nos.4 to 6 as Acctsed ", as ilLgd, artitrary and trnconstirutional and consequendy direct the 3rid Respondent to aher the sectiors from 174 G.P.Cto 306 IPC and add the respondent Nos.4 to 6 as accused in Gime No.Z9 of 2016 dt.23.03.2016 on the file Adibatla Police Station, C16erabad.... ."

2. I have heard Mr. T.R jinikanth Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.G.Aniketh Reddy, learned fusistant Govemment Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.L ro 3.

3. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner arises from the inaction of respondent No.3 in .1:Ag the section of law from secrion 174 of the code of criminat 2 Proce|arv, 197) ("Cr.P.C") to Section 306 of the kdian Penal Codq lS60 ("IPC,). It is contended that, despite the report and the circumstances of the case, the respondent police authorities failed to conduct a proper investigation. FIence, the presenr writ petition has been filed seeking appropriate directions to the respondents for further investigation and alteration of the section of law.

4. leamed Assistant Govemmenr Pleader for Ftrome, on the other hand, submits that after conducting a due and detailed investigation, the police concluded that the decexed had committed suicide by hanging, being vexed with his life Accorrdingly, a final report under Section 174 Cr.P.C was submitted before the Executive Magistrate, It[ehdipatnarq Ranga Reddy District. Therefore, it is argued that the grievance of the petitioner does not strrvive for consideration.

5. Leamed counsel for the unofficial respondents further submits that respondent Nos. 4 to 6 have no connection whatsoever with the incident and are in no manner involved in the alleged offence. It is asserted that their names have been L- 3 maliciously and unnecessarily introduced by the petitioner through false allegations, thereby dogging innocent persons into unwarranted litigation.

6. I have carefullyperused the materials available on record.

7. FI""i"g regad to the submissions of the leamed Assistant Govemment Pleader for Home, it is evident that the crime was duly investigated and a final repon has ,lr."dy been submitted before the competent lvlagistrate. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the manner of investigation, the law provides specific remedies under the Cr.P.C, including filing a protest petition before the Ivlagistrate under Section 190 Cr.P.C, seeking further investigation under Section 173(8) G.P.C, or moving an application under Section 156(3) G.P.C for appropriate directiors.

8. It is a settled principle that when the statute provides an efficacious and adequate akemative remedy, the extraondinary writ jurisdiction under Anicle 226 of the Corstitution should not ordinarily be involred, except in cases of gross violation of t I fundamental rights, lack of jurisdiction, or breach of principles of natural justice Qfblrpoot Corporation u. Registrar of Tradenarks, (199g) 8 SCC L; Union of india y. T.k Vanzta, AIR 1952 SC 8g2). The present dispute, tuming on factual aspecrs regarding the sufficiency and proprieryof investigarion, is one which falls squarelywithin the domain of the jurisdiction of rhe concemed l\4agistrate, vzho is empowered under the Cr.p.C to examine the correctness of the police report and direct funher investigation if necessary.

9. In rhe absence of any exraordinary or exceptional circumstance wan-anting the intervention of this Coun under Article 226, I find no merit in this writ petition. Nonetheless, liberry is reserved to the petitioner ro avail appropriate remedies as provided under law, should the cause of action still subsist.

10. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shal be no order as to costs. Miscellaneots Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. .:., t, Sd/.M.OSMAN ALI BAIG SISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to SRI T. RAJINIKANTH REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI It I U ' b :4:r::i

3. One CC to SRt P. PRABHAKAR RAO, Advocate [OpUC] 4. One CC to SMT. DSV MAHALAKSHMT, Advocate tOpUC] 5. Two CD Copies : MP q$_ PMK ,l ! I I I I I I i i: t i i I I I I I I i 1 ) ) i i : I , , I I I I, I i t I i I I I I t. I t I : I I I I \ I 1 I I J HIGH COURT DATED i0410912025 i riF- St4 !i ,(i 20tin M * ORDER WP.No.15406 ot 2017 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ?n- 6 l)-' t{ \ .:'.,:..n. j' ::.drr{-