APHC010129522026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3521]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 7132/2026 Between:

1. S USARALA VENKATA SUBBA RAO, S/O S.V.S.S.P. SASTRY, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O CHANDRIKA VILASINI, SRIRAMPURAM VILLAGE, RAJANAGARAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AS

2. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

3. T HE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

4. T HE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM.

5. T HE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NORTH ZONE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM.

6. T HE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, (CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE), RAJANAGARAM P.S, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. T V JAGGI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR HOME

2.

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“…to issue a writ, order or direction especially in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the Respondent No.5 in not conducting investigation, and retrieving the amount of Rs.28,82,000/- which were kept in hold/debt freeze in the seven bank accounts, as per the information furnished by the National Cyber Crime Authority, in pursuant to the F.I.R No.290 of 2024, on the file of the Rajanagaram P.S, East Godavari District, though the same is registered on 09-07-2024, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha Act, 2023 (Criminal Procedure Code, 1973), Art 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent No.5 to retrieve the amount of Rs.28,82,000/- which were kept in hold/debt freeze in the seven bank accounts, as per the information furnished by the National Cyber Crime Authority, in pursuant to the F.I.R No.290 of 2024, on the file of the Rajanagaram P.S, East Godavari District, expeditiously and pass…”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader.

3. Mr. T. V.Jaggi Reddy, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that although the complaint lodged by the petitioner was registered as a case against Accused in F.I.R.No.290 of 2024, dated 09.07.2024 on the file of Rajanagaram Urban Police Station, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code (for brevity ‘the IPC’) and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for brevity ‘the ITA’), by Respondent No.5, he has failed to proceed with the investigation and has not taken any steps to file the charge sheet.

4. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the investigation is at progressive stage, chargesheet would be filed after completion of the investigation.

5. Be that as it may, the Respondent No.5 is duty bound to conduct a thorough, fair, impartial and effective investigation and conduct the investigation to the logical end as per the procedure.

6. In this regard, it is apposite to refer the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in A. Shankar v. State, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 120, wherein at paragraph Nos. 15 and

20, it is held as under:

15. If the high court directs, at a stage prior to conclusion of investigation, that a charge-sheet has invariably to be fled upon closure of investigation in a particular case irrespective of what the materials are which have been collected during investigation and without allowing the investigating officer to form his own opinion as regards the next course of action, that would take away the discretion of such officer and he would be left with no other option but to proceed in the direction as requir