Bikkina Veerraju v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.By Its Principal

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.11894 OF 2015 Date:29.04.2015 Between:

Bikkina Veerraju and others .. Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.11894 OF 2015 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader

for Home appearing for the respondents.

Petitioners 1 and 2 are husband and wife, whereas petitioners 3 and 4 are their sons. Petitioners allege unlawful interference by respondents 3 and 4 and complain that they were frequently called to the Police Station, without there being any registration of crime against them.

The instructions of learned Government Pleader for Home from respondent No.3 Police state that on 22.04.2015 they received a complaint from one Posala Vijayalakshmi about missing of her daughter, by name, Rajani, aged about 15 years, and the complainant suspects that one of the sons of petitioners 1 and 2, namely, Bikkina Prasad is responsible for missing of the said girl and based on the said complaint, Crime No.84 of 2015 was registered and investigation is taken up by respondent No.3.

It is stated that in that connection, the respondent Police visited the petitioners residence to make enquiries about the suspect. The petitioners stated to have no information about the whereabouts of their son. Respondent No.3, therefore, states that the presence of the petitioners is required for investigation and there is no interference as alleged by the petitioners.

It is evident that a case of missing girl is under investigation by respondent No.3 and one of the sons of petitioners 1 and 2, namely, Bikkini Prasad, appears to be a suspect. Therefore, respondent No.3 is well justified in making enquiries with the petitioners and that by itself cannot be said to be amounting to interference as alleged by the petitioners. Even otherwise, the petitioners are bound to cooperate with the investigation and help the Investigating Officer to locate the missing girl. Learned counsel for the petitioners fairly states that the petitioners are wilfully cooperating with respondent No.3 and still appear whenever called for the purpose of investigation.

In view of the same, the priority for respondent No.3 is to complete the investigation in Crime No.84 of 2015 and locate the missing girl, as early as

possible.

After recording the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to give top priority for expeditious completion of investigation and in locating the missing girl. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J 29.04.2015 KH