Ba:r & Bench ([Link],ench.

com)

INDEX
[Link] PARTICULARS Part No. to which it Remarks
belongs.

Part I Part II
(Contents (Content
of Paper s of File
Book) alone)

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)

Court Fees Rs. nil/-

1. Office Report on Limitation

2. Listing Performa A1-A2

3. Cover Page of Paper Book A3

4. Index of Record of Proceedings A4

5. Limitation Report prepared by A5

Registry.

6. Defect List A6

7. Note Sheet NS1 to

8. Synopsis & List of Dates B-H

9. Writ Petition with Affidavit 1-20

10. Appendix 21

Article 32 of Constitution of
India

11. Annexure P-1

A true copy of the judgment

and order dated 23.09.2019
passed by this Hon’ble Court in
the case of PUCL & Anr. Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors in
Criminal Appeal No. 1255 of
1999.

12. Annexure P-2

A true copy of the order dated

18.07.2019 passed by this
Hon’ble Court in the case of the
M/s. Andhra Pradesh Police
Officers Association Vs. A.P.
Civil Liberties Committee in Civil
Appeal No. 5646 of 2019.
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

13. Annexure P-3

A true copy of the daily English

newspaper namely The Times
of India, news report item
dated 30.12.2019 downloaded
from its website.

14. Annexure P-4

A true copy of the daily English

newspaper namely The Hindu,
news report item dated
06.12.2019 downloaded from
its website.
15. Annexure P-5

A true copy of the daily English

newspaper namely The Indian
Express, news report item
dated 06.12.2019 downloaded
from its website.

16. I.A. No. /2019:

Application for Permission to
Appear & Argue the case as
Petitioner In-Person.

17. Filing Memo

18. Memo of Appearance

19. Special Power of Attorney

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

A1

LISTING PROFORMA

Section: PIL

The case pertains to (please tick/check the correct box)

I Central Act: (Title) Constitution of India

II Section: Article 14, 19 & 21

III Central Rule: (Title) NA

IV Rule No. (s) NA

V State Act: (Title) NA

VI Section NA

VII State Rule: (Title) NA

VIII Rule No. (s) NA

IX Impugned Interim Order (Date) NA

X Impugned Final Order/Decree: (Date) NA.

XI High Court: (Name) NA

XII Names of Judges NA

XIII Tribunal/Authority (Name) NA

1. Nature of Matter Writ Petition (Criminal)

2. (a) Petitioner/appellant No. 1 G.S. Mani

(b) e-mail ID: gsmlawyers@[Link]

(c) Mobile Phone number 09968023734

3 (a) Respondent No. 1 UOI

(b) e-mail ID: NA

(c) Mobile Phone number NA

4 (a) Main category classification 08: Letter Petition & PIL Matters

(b) Sub classification 0812: Others.

5 Not to be listed before NA

6 (a) Similar disposed of matter with No

citation, if any & case details

(b) Similar Pending matter with case No

details

7 Criminal Matters No

(a) Whether accused or convict has NA

surrendered
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

(b) FIR No. & Date NA

(c) Police Station NA

(d) Sentence Awarded NA

(e) Period of sentence undergone NA

including Period of Detention/Custody
undergone.

8 Land Acquisition Matters No

(a) Date of Section 4 notification NA

(b) Date of Section 6 notification NA

(c) Date of Section 17 notification NA

9. Tax matters: State the tax effect: NA

10. Special Category (first NA

petitioner/appellant only)

(a) Senior Citizen > 65 years NA

(b) SC/ST NA

(c) Women/Child NA

(d) Disabled NA

(e) Legal Aid Case NA

(f) In custody NA

11. Vehicle number (in case of Motor NA

Accident Claim matters)

G.S. Mani
Petitioner – in – person
Email:gsmlawyers@[Link]
Mobile:09968023734
Date: 07.12.2019
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

SYNOPSIS

Indisputably, no one including these PIL Writ Petitioners will support the accused

persons who involved in the gang rape and murder cases against innocent young

women in this country. However, an investigating agency of such cases and

officers even in the high level police officers like Commissioner of Police in the

police department taking the law into their hand, conducting fake encounter and

killing alleged rape accused without conducting a proper investigation, collecting

evidences, framing charges and without bringing them before the court for

punishment is very unfortunate. Such fake encounter killing was conducted only

to divert the public reaction over sensational gang rape and murder cases

against innocent young girls and may be to protect the real culprits which is very

serious, painful and not only impermissible under the rule of law but such fake

encounter killing is amounts to pre-planned murders in the hands of police

official with the help of power and public support.

In violation of the guidelines or observations of this Hon’ble Court in the case of

PUCL vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2014) 10 SCC 635, the respondent

police official conducted illegal fake encounter and killed 4 alleged rape accused

in Cyberabad area in the Telangana State. There is a clear chance of the

tampering evidences and witnesses by the respondent police official in the case

of fake encounter killing.

The respondent authorities not at all bothers about the latest judgment of three

judges bench of this Hon’ble Court’s order dated 18.07.2019 in the case of the

M/s. Andhra Pradesh Police Officers Association Vs. A.P. Civil Liberties Committee

in Civil Appeal No. 5646 of 2019 while upholding the 16 directions have been
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

issued by this Hon’ble Court earlier have again held that the directions issued by

this Hon’ble Court to be treated as law under Article 141 of the Constitution.

Due to the utter failure of the local police, in the night hours of 28th November,

2019, the victim Veterinarian doctor in the Talangana District was raped and

murdered. When, this rape and murder news reached to the public, the same

was shocked in the minds of larger public all over the nation as like Nirbhaya

case. The larger public and young girls’ and boys’, student and other sector

people started protest against the police and demanded severe punishment like

death penalty to the criminals. It is pertinent to note that the concerned local

police was refused to take immediate action and to register case against

unknown accused, when the victim’s family member went to the police station to

lodge a complaint prior to the rape and murder stating that his daughter was

missing last several hours. But the concerned local police replied that your

daughter might have gone up along with some one. These are all coming in

news. Because of these reasons, the larger public went against the police. In

order to divert the minds of the larger public reactions, it is submitted that the

concerned police personals have claimed that they have arrested 4 accused

persons within 24 hours. Having recording the statements of all the 4 alleged

accused persons, and having taken 14 days judicial custody, the respondent

police taken the 4 alleged accused in the spot where the victim was raped and

murdered and killed 4 alleged accused persons in the name of encounter. The

police they themselves executed death sentence without any due process of law

i.e. without making and framing charges, without producing evidences and

witnesses, without conducting trial, without examining and cross examining and

without there being on order of sessions, thereafter the Hon’ble High Court
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

confirmation over death penalty and thereafter this Hon’ble Courrt’s

confirmation.

The daily English newspaper namely The Times of India, news report item dated

30.12.2019 downloaded from its website revealed that “Telangana Veterinarian

doctor’s rape and murder 4 accused namely Mohammed Arif, Chintakunta

Chennakeshavulu, Jollu Shiva and Jollu Naveen have arrested by the police and

sent to 14 days judicial custody. The another daily English newspaper namely

The Hindu, news report item dated 06.12.2019 downloaded from its website

revealed a shocking a news that “All four accused in Hyderabad vet rape and

murder case shot dead”. The Cyberabad Police Commissioner namely the 4th

Respondent herein V.C. Sajjanar IPS, while speaking to the media said that the

accused persons Naveen and Shiv started pelting stone at the policemen and

tried to snatch their rods when they were taken to the crime spot for recreating

the crime scene. Arif and Chennakeshwalu snatched two 0.9 mm short pistols

from the special party and started firing. The police had to fire in relation, and

killed all the four of them, he added.” The news further claims that the exchange

of fir took place between 5.45 am to 6.15 am. The another daily English

newspaper namely Indian Express, news report item dated 06.12.2019

downloaded from its website says that the Cyberabad Police Commissioner

addressed the media and claimed that all the four accused were taken to

Chatanapally where they had burnt the women’s body for crime reconstruction

when they allegedly tried to escape by attacking the cops. All this happened

within 5 to 10 minutes after the four accused were brought to the spot. All these

news items clearly establishes that with the help of the high level police officer

may be with the help of 4th respondent, Mr. VC Sajjanar IPS who is specialist in

encounter killing as per his past records, have killed all these allged 4 rape and
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

murder accused in the early morning hours on the occurrence place only to

satisfy the larger public anguish or might have killed these alleged 4 accused to

protect the real culprit.

No one including the investigating agency like police has right to punish any

accused without due process of law. The Court alone after applying all the

procedure and law and affording an opportunity all the right of free and fair trial

and hearing can impose punishment of imprisonment or death sentence. Here

the respondent police have become hero in the public domain as they have killed

the rapists. When the Cyberabad Police Commissioner addressing the media his

body language clearly establish that he or his police team has no regret to the

encounter 4 killings. But his body language reflects that he and his police team

have achieved like anything and he and his police team have got very high

regards and respects from the larger public. The public surrounding the

encounter spot throwing the garlands to this police commissioner for their

commission of fake encounter. If this type of activities allowed, then there is no

meaning of civilized societies and there is no hope that we all are governed by

rule of law.

There is a clear chance of destroying the evidences available against the

respondent’s police officers who are involved in the fake encounter killing, it is

therefore, this Hon’ble Court may be restrain the concerned police officers from

respective official duties in the present case till the disposal of the this case and

till the completion of the independent investigation. Since, there is a chance of

tampering evidences and destroying the material documents and evidences by

the concerned police officers who are in high level, this Hon’ble Court may be
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

hear this PIL writ petition on an urgent basis and pass an appropriate order

accordingly in the interest of justice.

It is therefore, in the above said facts and circumstances, the PETITIONERS as a

PROBONO PUBLIC, who are a regular practicing lawyers of Hon’ble Supreme

Court of India, constrained to file this PIL Writ Petition under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India before this Hon’ble Court pleased to:- (a) ISSUE AN

APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION ESPECIALLY IN THE NATURE

OF WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS calling for the records of 2nd to 4th

Respondents/Telangana State authorities pertaining to the Fake Encounter killing

of alleged 4 rape accused by the Police personals of 4th Respondent, V.C.

Sajjanar, IPC, Cyberabad Police Commissioner, Telangana State and ordered for

registration of FIR for an offence under section 302 of IPC, an Independent

Investigation against the above said Police Personals including 4th respondent,

VC Sajjanar, IPC, Cyberabad Police Commissioner who involved in the above said

fake encounter killing of alleged 4 rape accused shall be conducted by an

independent agency like CBI, SIT, CID or any other police team of another State

Police under the supervision of a senior officer (at least a level above the head of

the police party engaged in the encounter and get the concerned police officials

who involved in fake encounter be brought before the law; and (b) ISSUE AN

APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER directing the independent investing agency to

strictly comply with the 16 guidelines issued by this Hon’ble Court in the case of

PUCL & Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. reported in (2014) 10 SCC 635 in

regard to the investigation over fake encounter killing; and render Justice.

Hence, the present PIL writ petition is filed.

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

LIST OF DATES

1998-1997 That nearly 99 encounters between the Mumbai

police and the alleged criminals resulting in death of

about 135 persons between 1995 and 1997 was

raised.

23.09.3019 That two judges bench of this Hon’ble Court vide its

judgment and order dated 23.09.2019 in the case of

PUCL & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors in

Criminal Appeal No. 1255 of 1999 have issued 16

directions to be followed in the case of independent

investigation over the encounter death.

18.07.2019 That again 3 judges bench of this Hon’ble Court vide

its order dated 18.07.2019 in the case of the M/s.

Andhra Pradesh Police Officers Association Vs. A.P.

Civil Liberties Committee in Civil Appeal No. 5646 of

2019 while upholding the 16 directions have been

issued by this Hon’ble Court earlier have again held

that the directions issued by this Hon’ble Court to be

treated as law under Article 141 of the Constitution.

28.11.2019 That in the night hours of 28th November, 2019, there

was an case of rape and murder of one Veterinarian

doctor in the Talangana District. When this rape and

murder news reached to the public it was shocked in

the minds of larger public all over the nation. The

larger public and young girls and boys student and

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

other sector of people started to protest against the

police and demanded severe punishment for the

criminals. It is pertinent to note that the concerned

police station was refused to take immediate action

and to register case when the victim’s family went to

the police station to lodge a complaint prior to the

rape and murder.

It is submitted that the concerned police personals

have claimed that they have arrested 4 accused

persons within 24 hours.

30.12.2019 The daily English newspaper namely The Times of

India, news report item dated 30.12.2019

downloaded from its website revealed that

“Telangana Veterinarian doctor’s rape and murder 4

accused namely Mohammed Arif, Chintakunta

Chennakeshavulu, Jollu Shiva and Jollu Naveen have

arrested by the police and sent to 14 days judicial

custody.

06.12.2019 The another daily English newspaper namely The

Hindu, news report item dated 06.12.2019

downloaded from its website revealed a shocking a

news that “All four accused in Hyderabad vet rape

and murder case shot dead”. The Cyberabad Police

Commissioner namely the 4th Respondent herein V.C.

Sajjanar IPS, while speaking to the media said that

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

the accused persons Naveen and Shiv started pelting

stone at the policemen and tried to snatch their rods

when they were taken to the crime spot for

recreating the crime scene. Arif and Chennakeshwalu

snatched two 0.9 mm short pistols from the special

party and started firing. The police had to fire in

relation, and killed all the four of them, he added.”

The news further claims that the exchange of fir took

place between 5.45 am to 6.15 am.

06.12.2019 The another daily English newspaper namely Indian

Express, news report item dated 06.12.2019

downloaded from its website says that the Cyberabad

Police Commissioner addressed the media and

claimed that all the four accused were taken to

Chatanapally where they had burnt the women’s body

for crime reconstruction when they allegedly tried to

escape by attacking the cops. All this happened

within 3 to 10 minutes after the four accused were

brought to the spot.

07.12.2019 Hence, the present PIL Writ Petition is filed.

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION [CRIMINAL] NO.____________OF 2019

[Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India read with Order XXXVIII, Rule 12
(1) (d) & 2 of The Supreme Court Rules, 2013)

BETWEEN:

1. G.S. Mani,
Advocate,
Aged about 39 years,
Son of K. Ganeshan Pillai,
R/O, B-707, Vardhaman Apartment,
Mayur Vihar Phase I Extension, Delhi-110 091.
Email: gsmlawyers@[Link]; Mob:09968023734,
PAN NO: AITPM2232K; Annual Income:
Gross Rs.15,01,414/-. BCD ID No.1688/G/25. …1st Petitioner

2. Pradeep Kumar Yadav,

Advocate,
Aged about 46 Years, S/o, Bharat Yadav,
16, Samachar Apartment, Mayur Vihar Phase I Etn.,
Delhi – 110 091. Email:[Link]@[Link],
Mob: 9990662762; PAN; AFFPY4370R;
ANNUAL INCOME: GROSS Rs. 10,00,000/-
SCBA ID: …2nd Petitioner

AND
1. Union of India,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Ministry of Home & Affairs,
North Block, New Delhi. ..Respondent No. 2

2. Chief Secretary,
Government of Telangana,
Block C, 3rd Floor, Telangana Secretariat,
Khairatabad, Hyderabad, Telangana. …Respondent No. 2

3. Director General of Police,

Government of Telangana,
Lakdi Pool Police Headquarters,
Hyderabad-500004, Telangana. …Respondent No. 3

4. V.C. Sajjanar, IPS,

Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad,
P/21, Old Mumbai Hwy,
Next to Care Hospital 2-48,
Sri Shyam Nagar,
Telecom Nagar Extension,
Gachibowli, Hyderabad,
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

Telangana 500032 …Respondent No. 4

All are contesting Respondents

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF

INDIA READ WITH ORDER XXXVIII, RULE 12 (1) (D) & 2 OF THE
SUPREME COURT RULES, 2013 TO (a) ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT
OR ORDER OR DIRECTION ESPECIALLY IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF
CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS CALLING FOR THE RECORDS OF 2ND
TO 4TH RESPONDENTS/TELANGANA STATE AUTHORITIES
PERTAINING TO THE FAKE ENCOUNTER KILLING OF ALLEGED 4
RAPE ACCUSED BY THE POLICE PERSONALS OF 4TH RESPONDENT,
V.C. SAJJANAR, IPC, CYBERABAD POLICE COMMISSIONER,
TELANGANA STATE AND ORDERED FOR REGISTRATION OF FIR FOR
AN OFFENCE UNDER SECTION 302 OF IPC, AN INDEPENDENT
INVESTIGATION AGAINST THE ABOVE SAID POLICE PERSONALS
INCLUDING 4TH RESPONDENT, VC SAJJANAR, IPC, CYBERABAD
POLICE COMMISSIONER WHO INVOLVED IN THE ABOVE SAID FAKE
ENCOUNTER KILLING OF ALLEGED 4 RAPE ACCUSED SHALL BE
CONDUCTED BY AN INDEPENDENT AGENCY LIKE CBI, SIT, CID OR
ANY OTHER POLICE TEAM OF ANOTHER STATE POLICE UNDER THE
SUPERVISION OF A SENIOR OFFICER (AT LEAST A LEVEL ABOVE THE
HEAD OF THE POLICE PARTY ENGAGED IN THE ENCOUNTER AND
GET THE CONCERNED POLICE OFFICIALS WHO INVOLVED IN FAKE
ENCOUNTER BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE LAW; AND (B) ISSUE AN
APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER DIRECTING THE INDEPENDENT
INVESTING AGENCY TO STRICTLY COMPLY WITH THE 16
GUIDELINES ISSUED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN THE CASE OF PUCL
& ANR. VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. REPORTED IN (2014)
10 SCC 635 IN REGARD TO THE INVESTIGATION OVER FAKE
ENCOUNTER KILLING; FOR THE VIOLATION OF THE RIGHTS UNDER
ARTICLE 14, 19 & 21 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

To, The Hon’ble The Chief Justice of India

And His Companion Justice of the
Supreme Court of India
The Humble Petition of the
Petitioner above named
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

1. The Petitioners as a regular practicing Advocates of this Hon’ble Court and

as a PROBONO PUBLIC has filed the present Public Interest Litigation

(PIL) Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before this

Hon’ble Court to ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR

DIRECTION ESPECIALLY IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED

MANDAMUS calling for the records of 2nd to 4th Respondents/Telangana

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

State authorities pertaining to the Fake Encounter killing of alleged 4 rape

accused by the Police personals of 4th Respondent, V.C. Sajjanar, IPC,

Cyberabad Police Commissioner, Telangana State and ordered for

registration of FIR for an offence under section 302 of IPC, an

Independent Investigation against the above said Police Personals

including 4th respondent, VC Sajjanar, IPC, Cyberabad Police

Commissioner who involved in the above said fake encounter killing of

alleged 4 rape accused shall be conducted by an independent agency like

CBI, SIT, CID or any other police team of another State Police under the

supervision of a senior officer (at least a level above the head of the

police party engaged in the encounter and get the concerned police

officials who involved in fake encounter be brought before the law; and

(b) ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER directing the independent

investing agency to strictly comply with the 16 guidelines issued by this

Hon’ble Court in the case of PUCL & Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

reported in (2014) 10 SCC 635 in regard to the investigation over fake

encounter killing; and for the enforcement of fundamental rights of

equality life and liberty guaranteed under Article 14, 19 and 21 of the

Constitution of large number of innocent small children who falls in to the

abandoned/opened bore well/tube well and their parent due to state

authorities failed and arbitrary action in this regard.

1A. It is clarified that since one of the relief sought in the present PIL writ

petition for registration of FIR, investigation and criminal action against

Police personal who involved in the fake encounter killing and thus the

nature of this Writ Petition is criminal in nature and hence the same has

been filed as Criminal Writ Petition.

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

1B. The Respondents herein are the proper authorities representing the

Government of India and concerned State police authorities that is

responsible for their police personals involving in fake encounter killing.

They are all covered by the definition of ‘State’ in Article 12 of the

Constitution, and as such, the present Petition is maintainable against

them.

1C. The relief mainly sought in the present WP against the respondent

State authority is call for the records, registration of FIR against erring

police official under section 302 of IPC and severe action against the

police personal who involved in the fake encounter killing and further

prayer was for the enforcement of fundamental rights of safety, security,

life, liberty and equality of innocent under trial criminals and fellow

citizens in the hand of police forces guaranteed by the Constitution under

Article 14,19 & 21. Hence, the petitioner did not make any representation

with the respondent’s/State authority as the same is not necessary for

writ of certiorarified mandamus for call for the records and for

enforcement of fundamental rights and thus the present Writ Petition is

filed.

2. FACTS OF THE CASE:

The Brief Facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows: -

2.1 That nearly 99 encounters between the Mumbai police and the alleged

criminals resulting in death of about 135 persons between 1995 and 1997

was raised.
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

2.2 That two judges bench of this Hon’ble Court vide its judgment and order

dated 23.09.2019 in the case of PUCL & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra &

Ors in Criminal Appeal No. 1255 of 1999 have issued 16 directions to be

followed in the case of independent investigation over the encounter

death. A true copy of the judgment and order dated 23.09.2019 passed

by this Hon’ble Court in the case of PUCL & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra

& Ors in Criminal Appeal No. 1255 of 1999 is filed herein as Annexure-

P1 (Pages

2.3 That again 3 judges bench of this Hon’ble Court vide its order dated

18.07.2019 in the case of the M/s. Andhra Pradesh Police Officers

Association Vs. A.P. Civil Liberties Committee in Civil Appeal No. 5646 of

2019 while upholding the 16 directions have been issued by this Hon’ble

Court earlier have again held that the directions issued by this Hon’ble

Court to be treated as law under Article 141 of the Constitution. A true

copy of the order dated 18.07.2019 passed by this Hon’ble Court in the

case of the M/s. Andhra Pradesh Police Officers Association Vs. A.P. Civil

Liberties Committee in Civil Appeal No. 5646 of 2019 is filed herein as

Annexure-P2 (Pages

2.4 That in the night hours of 28th November, 2019, there was an case of

rape and murder of one Veterinarian doctor in the Talangana District.

When this rape and murder news reached to the public it was shocked in

the minds of larger public all over the nation. The larger public and young

girls and boys student and other sector of people started to protest

against the police and demanded severe punishment for the criminals. It

is pertinent to note that the concerned police station was refused to take
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

immediate action and to register case when the victim’s family went to

the police station to lodge a complaint prior to the rape and murder.

2.5 It is submitted that the concerned police personals have claimed that they

have arrested 4 accused persons within 24 hours.

2.6 The daily English newspaper namely The Times of India, news report item

dated 30.12.2019 downloaded from its website revealed that “Telangana

Veterinarian doctor’s rape and murder 4 accused namely Mohammed Arif,

Chintakunta Chennakeshavulu, Jollu Shiva and Jollu Naveen have arrested

by the police and sent to 14 days judicial custody. A true copy of the daily

English newspaper namely The Times of India, news report item dated

30.12.2019 downloaded from its website is filed herein as Annexure-P3

(Pages

2.7 The another daily English newspaper namely The Hindu, news report item

dated 06.12.2019 downloaded from its website revealed a shocking a

news that “All four accused in Hyderabad vet rape and murder case shot

dead”. The Cyberabad Police Commissioner namely the 4th Respondent

herein V.C. Sajjanar IPS, while speaking to the media said that the

accused persons Naveen and Shiv started pelting stone at the policemen

and tried to snatch their rods when they were taken to the crime spot for

recreating the crime scene. Arif and Chennakeshwalu snatched two 0.9

mm short pistols from the special party and started firing. The police had

to fire in relation, and killed all the four of them, he added. The news

further claims that the exchange of fir tookplace between 5.45 am to 6.15

am. A true copy of the daily English newspaper namely The Hindu, news
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

report item dated 06.12.2019 downloaded from its website is filed herein

as Annexure-P4 (Pages

2.8 The another daily English newspaper namely Indian Express, news report

item dated 06.12.2019 downloaded from its website says that the

Cyberabad Police Commissioner addressed the media and claimed that all

the four accused were taken to Chatanapally where they had burnt the

wormen’s body for crime recontstruction when they allegedly tried to

escape by attacking the cops. All this happened within 3 to 10 minutes

after the four accused were brought to the spot .” A true copy of the daily

English newspaper namely The Indian Express, news report item dated

06.12.2019 downloaded from its website is filed herein as Annexure-P5

(Pages

2.9 Hence, the present PIL Writ Petition is filed.

3. GROUNDS:

The Petitioner seeking relief on the following grounds: -

3.1. Because this Hon’ble Court in the case of “PUCL & Anr. vs. State of

Maharashtra & Ors”. reported in (2014) 10 SCC 635 has held and

observed that:-

“7. Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees “right to live

with human dignity”. Any violation of human rights is viewed

seriously by this Court as right to life is the most precious right

guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. The guarantee by

Article 21 is available to every person and even the State has no

authority to violate that right.

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

11. In some of the countries when a police firearms officer is

involved in a shooting, there are strict guidelines and procedures in

place to ensure that what has happened is thoroughly investigated.

In India, unfortunately, such structured guidelines and procedures

are not in place where police is involved in shooting and death of

the subject occurs in such shooting. We are of the opinion that it is

the constitutional duty of this Court to put in place certain

guidelines adherence to which would help in bringing to justice the

perpetrators of the crime who take law in their own hands.

14. Union of India in its counter affidavit has given its comments to

the guidelines framed by the High Court and so also to the

guidelines suggested by learned counsel for PUCL. Union of India

has expressed its reservation on certain guidelines on diverse

counts including the practical difficulties in their implementation. As

regards States and Union Territories, their views are not uniform on

the guidelines framed by the High Court and also the guidelines

suggested by PUCL. In respect of some of the guidelines, some

States and Union Territories have toed the line of Union of India in

not accepting the same on the ground of practical difficulties in

their implementation. Few States have highlighted the procedure

that is being followed by them when any death or encounter takes

place. As regards investigation in such cases, some of the States

have highlighted that the investigation of such cases cannot be

done by officers / employees of the same police station and it is

ensured that investigation of such cases is done by some higher

officer. On the other hand, few States / Union Territories have

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

stated that initial investigation may be conducted by the local police

because local police is acquainted with the modus operandi of local

criminals and crime.

16. Article 21 of the Constitution provides “no person shall be

deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to

procedure established by law”. This Court has stated time and

again that Article 21 confers sacred and cherished right under the

Constitution which cannot be violated, except according to

procedure established by law. Article 21 guarantees personal liberty

to every single person in the country which includes the right to live

with human dignity.

17. In line with the guarantee provided by Article 21 and other

provisions in the Constitution of India, a number of statutory

provisions also seek to protect personal liberty, dignity and basic

human rights. In spite of Constitutional and statutory provisions

aimed at safeguarding the personal liberty and life of a citizen, the

cases of death in police encounters continue to occur. This Court

has been confronted with encounter cases from time to time. In

the case of “Chaitanya Kalbagh and Ors. V. State of UP and Ors.

Reported in (1989) 2 SCC 314), this Court was concerned with a

writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution wherein the

impartial investigation was sought for the alleged killing of 299

persons in the police encounters. The Court observed that in the

facts and circumstances presented before it, there was an

imperative need of ensuring that the guardians of law and order do

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

in fact observe the code of discipline expected of them and that

they function strictly as the protectors of innocent citizens.

18. In R.S. Sodhi Advocate v. State of U.P. and Ors.; [ 1994 Supp

(1) SCC 143], a writ petition was brought to this Court under Article

32 of the Constitution relating to an incident in which 10 persons

were reported to have been killed in what were described as

“encounters” between the Punjab militants and the local police. The

Court observed, “Whether the loss of lives was on account of a

genuine or a fake encounter is a matter which has to be inquired

into and investigated closely”. The Court entrusted the investigation

to the Central Bureau of Investigation (for short, “the CBI”) to

ensure that the investigation did not lack credibility.

19. In the case of Satyavir Singh Rathi vs. State through CBI

reported in (2011) 6 SCC 1), the matter before this Court arose

from the First Information Report (for short, “FIR”) registered

against police personnel involved in a shoot-out for an offence

punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for

short, “IPC”). In the complaint, it was alleged that the police

officials had surrounded the car and had fired indiscriminately and

without cause at the occupants, killing the two and causing

grievous injuries to the third. This Court concurred with the High

Court and the trial Court on the conviction under Section 302 IPC

and rejected the defence set up by the accused persons relying on

Exception 3 in Section 300 IPC as it was found to be not in good

faith or due discharge of their duty.

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

20. In the case of Prakash Kadam and ors. Vs. Ramprasad

Vishwanath Gupta and Anr. Reported in (2011(6 SCC 189, the

allegation was that the accused persons decided to eliminate the

deceased in a false police encounter. The Court noted that this was

a very serious case wherein prima facie some police officers and

staff were engaged by some private persons to kill their opponent

and the police officers and the staff acted as contract killers for

them. The Court warned policemen that they would not be excused

for committing murder in the name of “encounter” on the pretext

that they were carrying out the orders of their superior officers or

politicians. The Court said that the “encounter” philosophy is a

criminal philosophy.

21. In Om Prakash case (supra), the allegation against the accused

persons was that the complainant’s son was killed by them in a

fake police encounter. The Court, however, held that the encounter

was a genuine one though NHRC guideline for photography of the

autopsy was not complied with.

22. A two-Judge Bench of this Court in B.G. Verghese vs Union of

India and ors. Reported in (2013) 11 SCC 525, dealt with two writ

petitions. In Writ Petition (Criminal) No.31/2007, it was stated that

during the years 2003-2006, 21 police encounter killings took place

in the State of Gujarat. It was alleged that the so-called police

encounters were fake and the persons were killed by the police

officials in cold blood. In the writ petition a prayer was made for

ordering an inquiry into all the cases of police encounters, which,

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

according to the petitioner, were fake in order to establish the rule

of law and to bring out the truth in each case. In the other Writ

Petition (Criminal) No. 83/2007, the allegation related to the killing

of one person in a police encounter. It was alleged that this too

was an instance of fake encounter in which the victim was killed by

the officers of the crime branch of police in cold blood and in a

premeditated manner. The prayer was made in the writ petition to

order an independent investigation by a special investigation team

into all the fake encounters. During the pendency of the matter

before this Court, the State of Gujarat had constituted a Monitoring

Authority and Special Task Force for investigation of police

encounters. Since the former Judge of this Court was appointed as

Chairman of the Monitoring Authority, the Court requested the

Chairman of the Monitoring Authority to look into all the cases of

alleged fake encounters as enumerated in the two writ petitions

and to have them thoroughly investigated so that full and complete

truth comes to light in each case.

23. In the case of “Rohtash Kumar vs State of Haryana reported in

(2013) 14 SCC 290, again a two-Judge Bench of this Court was

confronted with killing of a person in an encounter by the police

officials. Having found that the death took place in the fake police

encounter, the Court directed an independent investigating agency

to conduct the investigation so that guilty could be brought to

justice.
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

24. The above cases have been referred only by way of illustration

to show that killings in police encounters require independent

investigation. The killings in police encounters affect the credibility

of the rule of law and the administration of the criminal justice

system.

25. We are not oblivious of the fact that police in India has to

perform a difficult and delicate task, particularly, when many

hardcore criminals, like, extremists, terrorists, drug peddlers,

smugglers who have organized gangs, have taken strong roots in

the society but then such criminals must be dealt with by the police

in an efficient and effective manner so as to bring them to justice

by following rule of law. We are of the view that it would be useful

and effective to structure appropriate guidelines to restore faith of

the people in police force. In a society governed by rule of law, it is

imperative that extra-judicial killings are properly and

independently investigated so that justice may be done”.

3.2. Because this Hon’ble Court in the case of “PUCL & Anr. vs. State of

Maharashtra & Ors”. reported in (2014) 10 SCC 635 has issued 16

guidelines and directions to the concerned authorities to follow following

requirement/conditions in the matter of investigating police encounters in

the case of death as the standard procedure for through, effective and

independent investigation:

“(1) Whenever the police is in receipt of any intelligence or tip-off

regarding criminal movements or activities pertaining to the

commission of grave criminal offence, it shall be reduced into

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

writing in some form (preferably into case diary) or in some

electronic form. Such recording need not reveal details of the

suspect or the location to which the party is headed. If such

intelligence or tip-off is received by a higher authority, the same

may be noted in some form without revealing details of the suspect

or the location.

(2) If pursuant to the tip-off or receipt of any intelligence, as

above, encounter takes place and firearm is used by the police

party and as a result of that, death occurs, an FIR to that effect

shall be registered and the same shall be forwarded to the court

under Section 157 of the Code without any delay. While

forwarding the report under Section 157 of the Code, the

procedure prescribed under Section 158 of the Code shall be

followed.

(3) An independent investigation into the incident/encounter shall

be conducted by the CID or police team of another police station

under the supervision of a senior officer (at least a level above the

head of the police party engaged in the encounter). The team

conducting inquiry/investigation shall, at a minimum, seek:

(a) To identify the victim; colour photographs of the victim should

be taken;

(b) To recover and preserve evidentiary material, including blood-

stained earth, hair, fibers and threads, etc., related to the death;
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

(c) To identify scene witnesses with complete names, addresses

and telephone numbers and obtain their statements (including the

statements of police personnel involved) concerning the death;

(d) To determine the cause, manner, location (including

preparation of rough sketch of topography of the scene and, if

possible, photo/video of the scene and any physical evidence) and

time of death as well as any pattern or practice that may have

brought about the death;

(e) It must be ensured that intact fingerprints of deceased are sent

for chemical analysis. Any other fingerprints should be located,

developed, lifted and sent for chemical analysis;

(f) Post-mortem must be conducted by two doctors in the District

Hospital, one of them, as far as possible, should be Incharge/Head

of the District Hospital. Post-mortem shall be videographed and

preserved;

(g) Any evidence of weapons, such as guns, projectiles, bullets and

cartridge cases, should be taken and preserved. Wherever

applicable, tests for gunshot residue and trace metal detection

should be performed.

(h) The cause of death should be found out, whether it was natural

death, accidental death, suicide or homicide.

(4) A Magisterial inquiry under Section 176 of the Code must

invariably be held in all cases of death which occur in the course of

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

police firing and a report thereof must be sent to Judicial

Magistrate having jurisdiction under Section 190 of the Code.

(5) The involvement of NHRC is not necessary unless there is

serious doubt about independent and impartial investigation.

However, the information of the incident without any delay must be

sent to NHRC or the State Human Rights Commission, as the case

may be.

(6) The injured criminal/victim should be provided medical aid and

his/her statement recorded by the Magistrate or Medical Officer

with certificate of fitness.

(7) It should be ensured that there is no delay in sending FIR, diary

entries, panchnamas, sketch, etc., to the concerned Court.

(8) After full investigation into the incident, the report should be

sent to the competent court under Section 173 of the Code. The

trial, pursuant to the chargesheet submitted by the Investigating

Officer, must be concluded expeditiously.

(9) In the event of death, the next of kin of the alleged

criminal/victim must be informed at the earliest.

(10) Six monthly statements of all cases where deaths have

occurred in police firing must be sent to NHRC by DGPs. It must be

ensured that the six monthly statements reach to NHRC by 15th

day of January and July, respectively. The statements may be sent

in the following format along with post mortem, inquest and,

wherever available, the inquiry reports: (i) Date and place of

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

occurrence. (ii) Police Station, District. (iii) Circumstances leading to

deaths: (a) Self defence in encounter. (b) In the course of

dispersal of unlawful assembly. (c) In the course of affecting

arrest. (iv) Brief facts of the incident. (v) Criminal Case No. (vi)

Investigating Agency. (vii) Findings of the Magisterial

Inquiry/Inquiry by Senior Officers: (a) disclosing, in particular,

names and designation of police officials, if found responsible for

the death; and (b) whether use of force was justified and action

taken was lawful.

(11) If on the conclusion of investigation the materials/evidence

having come on record show that death had occurred by use of

firearm amounting to offence under the IPC, disciplinary action

against such officer must be promptly initiated and he be placed

under suspension.

(12) As regards compensation to be granted to the dependants of

the victim who suffered death in a police encounter, the scheme

provided under Section 357-A of the Code must be applied.

(13) The police officer(s) concerned must surrender his/her

weapons for forensic and ballistic analysis, including any other

material, as required by the investigating team, subject to the

rights under Article 20 of the Constitution.

(14) An intimation about the incident must also be sent to the

police officer’s family and should the family need services of a

lawyer / counselling, same must be offered.

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

(15) No out-of-turn promotion or instant gallantry rewards shall be

bestowed on the concerned officers soon after the occurrence. It

must be ensured at all costs that such rewards are

given/recommended only when the gallantry of the concerned

officers is established beyond doubt.

(16) If the family of the victim finds that the above procedure has

not been followed or there exists a pattern of abuse or lack of

independent investigation or impartiality by any of the functionaries

as above mentioned, it may make a complaint to the Sessions

Judge having territorial jurisdiction over the place of incident. Upon

such complaint being made, the concerned Sessions Judge shall

look into the merits of the complaint and address the grievances

raised therein.

32. The above guidelines will also be applicable to grievous injury

cases in police encounter, as far as possible.

33. Accordingly, we direct that the above requirements / norms

must be strictly observed in all cases of death and grievous injury

in police encounters by treating them as law declared under Article

141 of the Constitution of India”.

3.3. Because this this Court in the case of “Om Prakash and Ors. Vs. State of

Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Home, Ranchi 1 and

Anr”. Reported in (2012) 12 SCC 72, para 42 has held that:-

“42. It is not the duty of the police officers to kill the accused

merely because he is a dreaded criminal. Undoubtedly, the police

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

have to arrest the accused and put them up for trial. This Court has

repeatedly admonished trigger-happy police personnel, who

liquidate criminals and project the incident as an encounter. Such

killings must be deprecated. They are not recognized as legal by

our criminal justice administration system. They amount to State-

sponsored terrorism. But, one cannot be oblivious of the fact that

there are cases where the police, who are performing their duty,

are attacked and killed. There is a rise in such incidents and judicial

notice must be taken of this fact. In such circumstances, while the

police have to do their legal duty of arresting the criminals, they

have also to protect themselves. The requirement of sanction to

prosecute affords protection to the policemen, who are sometimes

required to take drastic action against criminals to protect life and

property of the people and to protect themselves against attack.

Unless unimpeachable evidence is on record to establish that their

action is indefensible, mala fide and vindictive, they cannot be

subjected to prosecution. Sanction must be a precondition to their

prosecution. It affords necessary protection to such police

personnel. The plea regarding sanction can be raised at the

inception”.

3.4. Because in violation of the aforesaid guidelines or observations of this

Hon’ble Court in the above said cases the respondent police official and

conducted illegal fake encounter and killed 4 alleged rape accused in

Cyberabad area in the Telangana State. There is a clear chance of the

tampering the witnesses and evidence by the respondent police official in

the case of fake encounter killing.

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

3.5. Because of the fake encounter killing of nearly 99 encounters between the

Mumbai police and the alleged criminals resulting in death of about 135

persons between 1995 and 1997 was raised, this Hon’ble Court have

issued above said 16 directions in order to prevent the fake encounter

killings in the hands of erring police official. But the respondents police

authorities have allowed its police personal to do illegal encounter killing

only to please the public.

3.6. Because there is no meaning of 16 directions order of two judges bench

of this Hon’ble Court dated 23.09.2019 in the case of PUCL & Anr. Vs.

State of Maharashtra & Ors in Criminal Appeal No. 1255 of 1999

remaining in stature book without any strict compliance and if allowed

fake encounter killings to continue.

3.7. Because the respondent authorities not at all bothers about the latest

judgment of three judges bench of this Hon’ble Court’s order dated

18.07.2019 in the case of the M/s. Andhra Pradesh Police Officers

Association Vs. A.P. Civil Liberties Committee in Civil Appeal No. 5646 of

2019 while upholding the 16 directions have been issued by this Hon’ble

Court earlier have again held that the directions issued by this Hon’ble

Court to be treated as law under Article 141 of the Constitution.

3.8. Because of the utter failure of the local police, in the night hours of 28th

November, 2019, the victim Veterinarian doctor in the Talangana District

was raped and murdered. When this rape and murder news reached to

the public which was shocked in the minds of larger public all over the

nation as like Nirbhaya case. The larger public and young girls and boys’,

student and other sector people started to protest against the police and
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

demanded severe punishment like death penalty to the criminals. It is

pertinent to note that the concerned locl police was refused to take

immediate action and to register case against unknown accused, when

the victim’s family member went to the police station to lodge a complaint

prior to the rape and murder stating that his daughter was missing last

several hours. But the concerned local police replied that your daughter

might have gone up along with some one. These are all coming in news.

Because of these reasons, the larger public went against the police. In

order to divert the minds of the larger public reactions, it is submitted that

the concerned police personals have claimed that they have arrested 4

accused persons within 24 hours. Having recording the statements of all

the 4 alleged accused persons, and having taken 14 days judicial custody,

the respondent police taken the 4 alleged accused in the spot where the

victim was raped and murdered and killed 4 alleged accused persons in

the name of encounter. The police they themselves executed death

sentence without any due process of law i.e. without making and framing

charges, without producing evidences and witnesses, without conducting

trial, without examining and cross examining and without there being on

order of sessions, thereafter the Hon’ble High Court confirmation over

death penalty and thereafter this Hon’ble Courrt’s confirmation.

3.9. Because the daily English newspaper namely The Times of India, news

report item dated 30.12.2019 downloaded from its website revealed that

“Telangana Veterinarian doctor’s rape and murder 4 accused namely

Mohammed Arif, Chintakunta Chennakeshavulu, Jollu Shiva and Jollu

Naveen have arrested by the police and sent to 14 days judicial custody.

The another daily English newspaper namely The Hindu, news report item
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

dated 06.12.2019 downloaded from its website revealed a shocking a

news that “All four accused in Hyderabad vet rape and murder case shot

dead”. The Cyberabad Police Commissioner namely the 4th Respondent

herein V.C. Sajjanar IPS, while speaking to the media said that the

accused persons Naveen and Shiv started pelting stone at the policemen

and tried to snatch their rods when they were taken to the crime spot for

recreating the crime scene. Arif and Chennakeshwalu snatched two 0.9

mm short pistols from the special party and started firing. The police had

to fire in relation, and killed all the four of them, he added.” The news

further claims that the exchange of fir took place between 5.45 am to

6.15 am. The another daily English newspaper namely Indian Express,

news report item dated 06.12.2019 downloaded from its website says that

the Cyberabad Police Commissioner addressed the media and claimed that

all the four accused were taken to Chatanapally where they had burnt the

women’s body for crime reconstruction when they allegedly tried to

escape by attacking the cops. All this happened within 5 to 10 minutes

after the four accused were brought to the spot. All these news items

clearly establishes that with the help of the high level police officer may

be with the help of 4th respondent, Mr. VC Sajjanar IPS who is specialist in

encounter killing as per his past records, have killed all these allged 4 rape

and murder accused in the early morning hours on the occurrence place

only to satisfy the larger public anguish or might have killed these alleged

4 accused to protect the real culprit.

3.10. Because no one including the investigating agency like police has right to

punish any accused without due process of law. The Court alone after

applying all the procedure and law and affording an opportunity all the
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

right of free and fair trial and hearing can impose punishment of

imprisonment or death sentence. Here the respondent police have

become hero in the public domain as they have killed the rapists. When

the Cyberabad Police Commissioner addressing the media his body

language clearly establish that he or his police team has no regret to the

encounter 4 killings. But his body language reflects that he and his police

team have achieved like anything and he and his police team have got

very high regards and respects from the larger public. The public

surrounding the encounter spot throwing the garlands to this police

commissioner for their commission of fake encounter. If this type of

activities allowed, then there is no meaning of civilized societies and there

is no hope that we all are governed by rule of law.

3.11. Because there is a clear chance of destroying the evidences available

against the respondent’s police officers who are involved in the fake

encounter killing, it is therefore, this Hon’ble Court may be restrain the

concerned police officers from respective official duties in the present case

till the disposal of the this case and till the completion of the independent

investigation. Since, there is a chance of tampering evidences and

destroying the material documents and evidences by the concerned police

officers who are in high level, this Hon’ble Court may be hear this PIL writ

petition on an urgent basis and pass an appropriate order accordingly in

the interest of justice.

3.12. Because of the aforesaid facts, circumstances and grounds, this Hon’ble

Court may be pleased to ordered for registration of FIR, an Independent

Investigation against the above said Police Personals including 4th

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

respondent, VC Sajjanar, IPC, Cyberabad Police Commissioner who

involved in the above said fake encounter killing of alleged 4 rape accused

shall be conducted by an independent agency like CBI, SIT, CID or any

other police team of another State Police under the supervision of a senior

officer (at least a level above the head of the police party engaged in the

encounter and get the concerned police officials who involved in fake

encounter be brought before the law; and directing the independent

investing agency to strictly comply with the 16 guidelines issued by this

Hon’ble Court in the case of PUCL & Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.

reported in (2014) 10 SCC 635 in regard to the investigation over fake

encounter killing

4. NATURE OF INJURY CAUSED OR5 LIKELY TO BE CAUSED TO THE

PUBLIC:

The action of respondent police officials in killing alleged 4 rape accused

in a fake encounter will cause the fundamental rights of life, liberty,

safety, security, law and order and equality guaranteed under Article 19,

21 and 14 of the Constitution of large number of innocent public are likely

to be caused.

5. NATURE AND EXTENT OF PERSONAL INTEREST, IF ANY, OF THE

PETITIONER:

The Petitioners are a regular practicing Advocate of this Hon’ble court has

no personal interest over this present PIL Writ Petition against the

Respondent/State Authority. Purely a Fundamental right of innocent under

trial criminal and fellow citizens who are victimized in the hands of police

official for their fake encounter killing.

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

6. DETAILS OF LEGAL NEXUS OF PETITIONER WITH PRESENT PIL:

The Petitioners have not involved in any civil, criminal or revenue litigation

in legal nexus with the issue(s) involved in the Public Interest Litigation:

7. DECLARATION OF REPRESENTATION MADE & CONCERNED

GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY APPROACHED IF ANY & ITS RESULT:

The relief mainly sought in the present WP against the respondent State

authority is call for the records, registration of FIR against erring police

official under section 302 of IPC and severe action against the police

personal who involved in the fake encounter killing and further prayer was

for the enforcement of fundamental rights of safety, security, life, liberty

and equality of innocent under trial criminals and fellow citizens in the

hand of police forces guaranteed by the Constitution under Article 14,19 &

21. Hence, the petitioner did not make any representation with the

respondent’s/State authority as the same is not necessary for writ of

certiorarified mandamus for call for the records and for enforcement of

fundamental rights and thus the present Writ Petition is filed.

8. AFFIDAVIT OF NO PERSONAL GAIN OR MOTIVE:

The Petitioners have filed an affidavit stating that there is no personal

gain, private motive or oblique reason in filing the Public Interest

Litigation with this petition. The Petitioner further states that the

petitioner has spent his own money for this PIL Writ Petition.

9. COURT MAY IMPOSE EXEMPLARY COSTS IF ANY:

The issue involved in the present WP is a purely a legal issues and it is

filed in the larger public interest and to protect their fundamental rights of

equality. The Court may impose exemplary costs on the petitioner(s) if it

 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

finds that the petition was frivolous or instituted with oblique or mala fide

motive or lacks bona fides.

10. DECLARATION OF NO CASE FILED EARLIER:

That the petitioners state that no other similar petition has been filed

before this Hon’ble Court or before any other Court earlier either by the

Petitioners or any other persons.

11. PRAYER:

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is most respectfully

prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to: -

a) ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION

ESPECIALLY IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED

MANDAMUS calling for the records of 2nd to 4th

Respondents/Telangana State authorities pertaining to the Fake

Encounter killing of alleged 4 rape accused by the Police personals of

4th Respondent, V.C. Sajjanar, IPC, Cyberabad Police Commissioner,

Telangana State and ordered for registration of FIR, an Independent

Investigation against the above said Police Personals including 4th

respondent, VC Sajjanar, IPC, Cyberabad Police Commissioner who

involved in the above said fake encounter killing of alleged 4 rape

accused shall be conducted by an independent agency like CBI, SIT,

CID or any other police team of another State Police under the

supervision of a senior officer (at least a level above the head of the

police party engaged in the encounter and get the concerned police
 Ba:r & Bench ([Link],[Link])

officials who involved in fake encounter be brought before the law;

and

b) ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER directing the independent

investing agency to strictly comply with the 16 guidelines issued by

this Hon’ble Court in the case of PUCL & Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra

& Ors. reported in (2014) 10 SCC 635 in regard to the investigation

over fake encounter killing; and

c) Pass such other and further order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may

deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONERS AS IN DUTY BOUND

SHALL EVER PRAY.

DRAWN & FILED BY

G.S. MANI,
1 Petitioner in Person
st

Place: New Delhi

Drawn on: 06.12.2019
Filed On: 07.12.2019