This writ petition has been instituted seeking a writ of mandamus for striking off the false report/opinion of DNA/334/2009, dated 25.5.2010, rendered in connection with CC No.488 of 2010 (Crime No.130 of 2009) on the file of the VII Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry and to declare the same as illegal.

2. This writ petition appeared in the list for the first time on 5.8.2011 and after hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner, I directed the learned Government Pleader for Home to make available the investigation report in the matter, before me. Thereafter the case appeared on 9.8.2011, 10.8.2011, 11.8.2011 and 12.8.2011, but I did not have the benefit of hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner. However, Ms. Niyathi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has produced the record for my consideration.

3. It is stated that the petitioner was carrying on business at Kakinada, East Godavari District. Serious allegations have been leveled by the petitioner about the nature and conduct of the 5th respondent herein. It is submitted that the 5th respondent has unjustly implicated the petitioner as responsible for her pregnancy and started threatening and blackmailing him, ever since. It is further submitted that to save his reputation in the society and also to ward off the prospects of losing esteem in the society, he has signed and delivered three crossed account payee cheques for a sum of Rs.2,20,000/-. Notwithstanding these payments, the 5th respondent has lodged a false complaint against the petitioner unnecessarily and unjustly implicating him. The Station House Officer, I Town Police Station (Law & Order) at Kakinada, has, therefore, been approached by the petitioner and he lodged a complaint narrating as to how he has been subjected to victimization by the 5th respondent and the police have registered the complaint in Crime No.189 of 2009 and have undertaken investigation into the matter. The 5th respondent, thereafter, seems to have approached the Town Police Station (Law & Order), Kakinada, repeating the same old wild allegations against the petitioner and the local police have registered Crime No.130 of 2009 on 23.11.2009. It is further alleged that the 5th respondent has delivered a male child on 2.10.2009 at Government Hospital, Kothapeta, Ravulapalem Mandal, East Godavari District. It is stated that the 5th respondent, in fact, joined hands with several antisocial elements and purchased a male child at Government General Hospital, Kakinada, as a part of her plan for implicating the petitioner and that this issue has received wide media coverage also. The 5th respondent was said to be enjoying the support of the local politicians and hence, she has falsely implicated this petitioner. However, it appears that the local police have collected the blood samples from three individuals; one of them is the writ petitioner and the other is the 5th respondent, while the third sample is said to have been collected from the tender child and sent them to the A.P. Forensic Science Laboratory, Red Hills, Hyderabad (henceforth referred to as 'the FSL'). The FSL has analyzed the three blood samples and tendered its opinion that the writ petitioner is the biological father of the male child of the 5th respondent and the 5th respondent is declared as the biological mother of the said child. Hence, this writ petition has been instituted for quashing the false report, thus generated by the respondents.

4. It is not in dispute that the three blood samples collected from three different persons were submitted to the FSL for rendering an opinion. The blood sample collected from the 5th respondent is marked as Item No.1 by the FSL. The blood sample said to have been collected from the male child of the 5th respondent, who is two months old, is marked as Item No.2, while the blood sample collected from the petitioner is marked as Item No.3. The FSL, Hyderabad, have rendered their opinion on 25.5.2010. It