ORDER

The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent No.2 to act in accordance with law and seize the gold articles stolen by the accused in connection with Cr.No.914 of 2021, Medipally Police Station.

2. The case of the petitioner is that Cr.No.914 of 2021 was regsistered for the offences under Sections 379, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The respondent No.2 conducted investigation and filed charge sheet.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on the basis of the written instructions, submitted that the petitioner lodged a private complaint before the IV Metropolitan Magistrate, L.B. Nagar, alleging that one Beesa Bhagyamma and another commited theft of Necklace weighing 152.6 grams and one HIP Belt weighing 146 grams, total 298.6 grams. They have pledged the gold ornaments with Fed Bank and took gold loan of Rs.9,76,000/-

without knowledge and without intimation to the petitioner.

FIR.No.914 of 2021 was registered for the offences under Sections 379, 406 and 420 IPC. During the course of investigation, the section of law has been altered to Sections 406 and 420 IPC and charge sheet was filed vide CC.No.4144 of 2022 and the case is pending trial before the Principal Junior Civil Judge –cum- IV Additional Metroplitan Magistarte, Medchal. The accused has deposted the gold ornaments before the Fed Bank and the respondent No.2 is not the competent authority to seize the gold ornaments.

4. On seeing the contents of the charge sheet, the case of the prosecution is that L.W.3 is living in USA. The accused Bhagyamma is the daughter-in-law of L.W.1 and sister-in-law of L.W.3. When L.W.3 was leaving India for USA, trusting the accused, she kept jewellery with her and the acused took gold loan of Rs.9,76,000/-

pledging the jewellery from Fed Bank without knowledge and without intimation to L.W.3. When L.W.3 requested the accused to return the jewellery, the accused refised to return the jewellery and prolonged the issue by giving lame execuses. Thus, according to the Investigation Officer, the offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust punishable under Sections 420 and 406 IPC are made out and no offence under punishable under Section 379 IPC is made out.

5. In view of the above, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that police should have seized the gold ornaments is without any basis. This Court, sitting in Writ jurisdiction, would not interfere in the investigation unless there illegality committed by the Investigation Officer. When charge sheet is filed for the offences under Sections 420 and 406 IPC, the remedy available to the petitioner is to file an appropriate application for alteration of Section of law or by filing a protest petition but not by invoking writ jurisdiction.

6. In view of the above, there are no merits in the writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. However, the petitioner is given liberty to invoke appropriate legal remedy.

The miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

____________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J July 2, 2024 DSK