IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that further investigation is permissible under Section 173(8) CrPC even after a charge sheet is filed, ensuring a fair and just investigation.

ORDER :

This writ petition is filed declaring the action of the respondents in filing charge sheet in FIR No.110 of 2014 on the file of P.G Ghantasala, Krishna District, without conducting proper investigation more particularly without collecting/ mentioning the call data of the accused arrayed therein and in not conducted investigation a fair and transparent manner right from the stage of registering the crime as illegal and arbitrary. Consequently to direct the respondents No.3 to 6 to conduct further investigation in FIR No.110 of 2014 dated 22.7.2014 on the file of Ghantasala police station, Krishna District.

2. The facts of the case are that the father of the petitioner was brutally murdered by one Venkata Nageswara Rao @ Raja and others on 22.6.2014 at 14.00 hrs. In the year 1992, the junior paternal uncle of the said Venkata Nageswara Rao was murdered by Lingineni Nageswara Rao. It is further stated that, on 22.6.2014 the police registered a case in FIR No.110 of 2014 under Section 302 IPC on the complaint given by the mother of the petitioner. After obtaining the certified copies and after analyzing all the aspects, the petitioner was able to sense that the investigation is not being done in proper respective as the basic version of the complainant was not mentioned by the police in the complaint. Even in the seizure report, the police did not seize the phone of the accused and not conducted the investigation in the technical way viz., gathering the cell phone call data, tracing the calls made prior to the committing of the offence, tracing the repeated cell numbers and examining them, etc., Accordingly, on 17.8.2014, the petitioner made a detailed representation to the respondent No.2 requesting to look into the matter. But till date there is no response. Hence the present writ petition.

3. Heard Sri K.S. Murthy, learned Senior Counsel represent M/s Pillix Law Firm, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and Sri K. Venkat Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

4. On hearing, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner while reiterating the contents made in the petition, submits that, the petitioner herein is the Advocate by profession and practicing as such in High Court of A.P for the past 10 years. The petitioner’s father was brutally murdered by one Venkata Nageswara Rao @ Raja, Ghantasala Mandal and others on 22.06.2014 at 14.00 hrs. The said incident was took place at petitioner’s farm and when his father had gone there to draw water to their garden along with his mother on that day. Thereafter, basing on the complaint given by the petitioner’s mother, the police have registered a case in FIR No.110 of 2014 under Section 302 IPC on 22.06.2014. Learned Senior counsel further submits that, at the time of registering the complaint, neither the petitioner nor his brother were present and at the time of incident the petitioner was in Hyderabad and reached that place in the night and similarly the petitioner’s brother who was residing in Vijayawada also reached after two hours of the incident. He further submits that, in this case, the present accused executed the murder along with four other accused and hence it is clear that all the FIVE accused have executed the offence of Murder in a very brutal way. He further submits that the recovery was made by the police in the scene of offence and admittedly two weapons were recovered by police and therefore it clearly shows that single person cannot hold two weapons and cannot attack and cut the body into ten pieces. But the investigation officer has not considered and concentrated on these aspects and remanded the accused stating that he is the sole accused in the case.

5. Learned senior counsel further submits that, earlier, the petitioner has already filed a writ petition in WP No.28618 of 2014 and the same is pending adjudication before this Court. Subsequent to filing of the above writ petition, the investigating agency