JUDGMENT : B. VEERAPPA, J. 1. Petitioner has filed the writ petition seeking writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos.3 and 4 to hand-over the entire case file along with entire investigation and collected materials to respondent No.1-The Director General & I.G.P., and also direct respondent No.1 to refer the further investigation to either C.C.B. or C.O.D. for proper and fair investigation with the supervision of respondent No.1. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is younger brother of the deceased - Venkatesh and was working as a Driver driving both light and heavy vehicles, was unmarried and engagement had taken place for the marriage of deceased-Venkatesh with a girl of Kaggadasa Village, Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu. The deceased left in his Tata Indica Car bearing Registration No.KA-05-AA-6345 standing in his name for his business on 03.04.2014 at 10.00 p.m. On 04.04.2014, at 11.30 a.m., the respondent - Police came to the petitioner's house with a Driving License and R.C. Card, I.D., Card showing to identify the persons and informed that the said person has died consuming poison between Chandapura and Ramasagara Railway Line. 3. On the basis of the same, the petitioner has lodged a complaint before the Attibele Police, who registered a case in UDR No.9/2014 under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. An inquest was held on the dead body, after registration of UDR on 04.04.2014. After going through the contents of the Report and also the other materials, the petitioner came to know that the deceased - Venkatesh has not consumed poison, but he was killed by Yashoda, Venkatesh, Yashoda's brother. Subsequently, the petitioner came to know that his name was Lokesh. Therefore, the petitioner has lodged the complaint before the police and the police have registered a case in Crime No.197/2014 under Section 306 read with Section 34 of IPC. On 02.08.2014, the petitioner had filed the petition before Additional Civil Judge and JMFC, Anekal in Crime NO.197/2014 seeking to register the case under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC, besides sought for direction to Attibele Police to secure the call sheet register. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Court has passed an order directing the I.O. to conduct the investigation and submit charge sheet in accordance with law. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Court has passed an order directing the I.O. to conduct the investigation and submit charge sheet in accordance with law. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation to respondent No.1 on 22.04.2014, 02.06.2014, bringing to the notice about the apprehension of the petitioner that conducting the investigation by the respondent Nos.3 and 4 is not a proper direction. Hence, sought direction to respondent No.1 to refer the matter to either CCB or COD for fair and proper investigation. Hence, the present writ petition is filed for relief sought for. 4. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SMT. SUNITA DEVI AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS, 2019 2 Crimes(SC) 21. 5. The State Government has filed the objections contending that the very writ petition filed by the petitioner for relief sought for is not maintainable. Further, it is contended that respondent No.4 - Police Anekal, after receipt of the telephonic message on 03.04.2014 stating that a dead body of the person is lying near Ramasagara- Chandapura Road Railway Station bridge. On such information, the officials of respondent No.4 have rushed to the spot and found that a person was lying near the said spot. On the basis of the said information, the jurisdictional police have drawn mahazar and shifted the body to the Government Hospital, Attibele. The petitioner has identified the body as his brother's. It is contended that the petitioner has given written complaint dated 04.04.2014 alleging that his brother has committed suicide due to frustration. Based on the said complaint, respondent No.4 has registered a case in UDR No.09/2014. Further, it is contended that the jurisdictional police have drawn the inquest mahazar and requested the Government Hospital to perform the Post Mortem on the body. It is further contended that on 04.04.2014, the Attibele Government Hospital has performed the post mortem on the dead body and the same is handed over to the petitioner and his family members. 6. It is further contended that on 20.06.2014, the FSL Lab Madiwala has prepared the report on the samples collected from the body of the deceased at the time of post mortem and also furnished the report. 6. It is further contended that on 20.06.2014, the FSL Lab Madiwala has prepared the report on the samples collected from the body of the deceased at the time of post mortem and also furnished the report. Based on the said report, the Administrative Medical Officer of Government Hospital, Atttibele has furnished the final opinion on 30.06.2014 stating that the death of deceased- Venkatesh was due to "poisoning causing reciprocatory and cardiac failure". It is further contended that after the incident on 09.07.2014, the petitioner has given written complaint to respondent No.4 alleging that the offence of abetment to commit suicide of his brother by Smt. Yashoda, Sri. Venkatesh and Lokesh. The petitioner in his complaint on 09.07.2014, alleged that the deceased - Venkatesh was knowing Smt. Yashoda and had given rupees Two Lakhs and hears have telephonic conversation and he was received messages from her and further alleged that it is those persons, who have threatened the petitioner and by which, the petitioner's brother has committed suicide. It is further contended that on the basis of the complaint, respondent No.4 - police had registered the same in Crime No.197/2014 for the offence punishable under Section 306 read with Section 34 of IPC. After investigation, the jurisdictional police filed a charge sheet on 13.10.2014. Therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is undisputed fact that on the basis of the complaint, information received on first occasion, the jurisdictional police have registered a case in UDR No.9/2014. Subsequently, another compliant was made by the petitioner to the jurisdictional police and a case has been registered in Crime No.197/2014 under the provisions of Section 306 read with Section 34 of IPC. After investigation, now the report has been filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court. At the time when writ petition came to be filed by the petitioner on 20.09.2014, investigation was in process. Learned Government Advocate submits that during the pendency of the present writ petition, since no interim order was granted, the investigation was proceeded and charge sheet has been filed on 13.10.2014 in CC No.120/2014. 8. In view of the above, it is for the petitioner to challenge the charge sheet filed in CC No.120/2014 if he is so aggrieved in accordance with law. 8. In view of the above, it is for the petitioner to challenge the charge sheet filed in CC No.120/2014 if he is so aggrieved in accordance with law. All the contentions including the judgment relied on by the petitioner is kept open to be urged at the appropriate relevant point of time. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.