Mulakala Bhaskar v. 4.2025 through registered post given by the

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 Respondent No. 11, 10 and 1 1 to stop telecasting influencing the police investigation in crime No. 136/2025 of Rajanagaram Police Station on the cause of death of deceased Praveen Pagadala pending disposal of the above writ petition. lA NO: 2 OF 2025 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 Respondent No. 3 and 4 to secure the CC TV Footage of the Deceased Pastor Praveen Pagadala Travel rout right from his home where and when he started on 24.03.2025 from Hyderabad pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D.SURESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1,3,5,6 & 8: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2,4 & 7: GP FOR HOME (AP) Counsel for the Respondent Nos.9 TO 11: - The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR Writ Petition No.11272 ol 2O25 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Governmen! Pleader tor Home appearing for respondent Nos.1, 3, 5, 6 and B and learned Government Pleader for Home for the State of Andhra Pradesh appearing for respondent Nos.2, 4 and 7, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage.

2. Having regard to the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition at the admission stage and the nature of /s involved, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondent Nos.g to 11 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner, in brief, is that though the alleged incident had occurred in the State of Andhra Pradesh, the authorities acting under the 2nd respondent authority having registered a case, vide Crime No.136 of 2025 dt.25.03.2025 on the file of Rajanagaram Police Station, East Godavari, the respondents-authorities are not conducting investigation in proper manner by collecting all the evidences including CCW footages from the point where the deceased has commenced his travel to the State of Andhra Pradesh, as the deceased had died under suspicious circumstances (unnatural death), for which the 2 petitioner had approached the respondents-authorities and submitted representations dt.06.04.2025 by e-mail and dt.07.04.2025 by registered post, and in spi:e of receiving the same, no actlon is being taken on the said representations. The inaction on the part of the respondehts_ authorities it is r:ontended as highly illegal, unlawful, dereliction of duties and violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the constitution of India.

4. Per contra, learned Government pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 3, 5, 6 and g would submit that the aforesaid crime has been registered in the jurisdiction of the State o1q Andhra Pradesh and if the petitioner is aggrieved by the course oF investigation being undertaken by the said authorities and any further information that is required for the purpose of conducting rnvestigation into the foresaid crime, the petitioner has to move the concerned Couft in the State of Andhra Pradesh and for the said reason, the present writ petition as filed is not maintainable.

5. Learned Government pleader for Home for the State of Andhra Pradesh appearing for respondent Nos.2, 4 and 7 would submit that since the authorities in the state of Andhra pradesh have already registered a case, vide Crimer No.136 of 2025 dl.2S.O3.2O2S, and are conducting investigation intc the aforesaid crime and if the petitioner is either aggrieved by the manner of investigation or the provisions under which t L 3 the aforesaid crime is registered, he has to approach the concerned Magistrate in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

6. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.

7. Having regard to the submissions made as above, as admittedly, the incident being complained of having occurred in the State of Andhra Pradesh, this Court is of the view that the petitioner instead of approaching this Court has to approach the concerned Court/Magistrate in the State of Andhra Pradesh for whatever relief he intends to seek and for the said reason, the present Writ Petition as filed is not maintainable.. B. Granting liberty to the petitioner to approach appropriate Court/Magistrate, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

9. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. I \ To //TRUE COPY// SD/.V.KATITHA DEPU#\eFrRii-C \ SECTION UTTICER

1. One CC to SRI D.SURESH KUt\ilAR, Advocate tgPUCl i. il; 66;i"-ci FOR HO-ME,'Hish iourt for the-State of Telansana, at .. +il|"StSfd t?'.8- HoME, Andhra pradesh Hish court, at Amaravathi. 4. Two CD Copies tOUI PSK. HIGH COURT DATED:1 610412025 ORDER WP.No.11272 of 2025 CC TODAY l trr- * .) s./( 1 i lt,r ?t?i > 1-) ir i'j \i \ DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS u