1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? : Yes

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Marked to Law Reporters/Journals? : Yes

3. Whether His Lordship wishes to see the fair copy of the Judgment? : Yes

N. TUKARAMJI, J

Counsel for the petitioners : Mr. Sujith Jaiswal, Learned counsel for the petitioners.

Counsel for respondents : Mr. D. Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for all the respondents.

GIST:

HEAD NOTE:

Cases referred Babubhai v. State of Gujarat [(2010) 12 SCC 254]; State of West Bengal v. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights [(2010) 3 SCC 571].

O R D E R:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Writs, Order or Orders calling for records relating to Crime No. 110 of 2017 Dated 14.06.2017 on the file of Respondent No.4 Police Station as the same is arbitrary, unconstitutional and against to the principles of natural justice and consequently to transfer the Case with FIR No. 110/2017 Dated 14.06.2017 on the file of P.S. Kuknoorpally, Siddipet District to CBCID or any other independent impartial special investigating agency and pass such other and further order or orders…”

2. I have heard Mr. Sujith Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Mr. Mahesh Raje, learned Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of the respondents.

Petitioners’ Case

3.1. The brief facts, as set out by the petitioners, are that the husband of petitioner No.1 and son of petitioner No.2, namely late P. Prabhakar Reddy, who was serving as a Sub-Inspector of Police at Police Station Kukunoorpally, Siddipet District, allegedly committed suicide on 14.06.2017 during the afternoon hours at the Police Headquarters, Siddipet, by shooting himself on the forehead with his service revolver. On the same day, a complaint was lodged by one Bhaskar Reddy, the brother-in-law of petitioner No.1, before Kukunoorpally Police Station under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, resulting in registration of FIR in Crime No.110 of 2017. In the said complaint, a strong suspicion was expressed against the then Assistant Commissioner of Police, Gajwel, alleging that he had abetted the commission of suicide.

3.2. It is further the case of the petitioners that although the incident is stated to have occurred between 12:00 noon and 12:30 PM, by the time the family members reached the scene, certain crucial developments had already taken place. It is alleged, based on reliable information, that immediately after the incident, the said ACP entered the police quarters, secured and screened the crime scene, and removed a suicide note purportedly authored by the deceased, which allegedly contained the reasons for his death.

3.3. The petitioners further allege that the said ACP, abusing his official position, cleared the premises, locked the house from inside, tampered with material evidence, and removed valuables such as rings and chains from the body of the deceased. It is also contended that the deceased had been subjected to continuous harassment and coercion by the said superior officer, who allegedly compelled him to perform illegal and unofficial acts, thereby causing severe mental distress. The deceased is stated to have repeatedly expressed his anguish over such harassment, ultimately leading him to take the extreme step.

3.4. The petitioners further contend that the investigation conducted by the police authorities is biased and lacks fairness, as it seeks to shield the accused officer. Despite serious allegations, no effective or impartial investigation has been undertaken. The request of the petitioners for transfer of investigation to the CBCID has not been considered, and they have been excluded from the investigative process, thereby giving rise to a reasonable apprehension of collusion and miscarriage of justice.

Submissions of the Peti