HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.27744 of 2010 Date: February 01, 2011 Between: Reddy Narayanamma, W/o.Reddy Demudu, Aged about 60 years, R/o.MIG- 112, Reddy Twins Castles, Pothina Mallayapalem, Visakhapatnam and another … Petitioners And The Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam City, Visakhapatnam and others … Respondents Order: Petitioners seek a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent, Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam City, Visakhapatnam, in not initiating enquiry against respondents 2, 3 and 4, for interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment of house property admeasuring 233 square yards in Sy.No.46, which is assigned house No.MIG-112, situated at Pothinamallayyapalem, Visakhapatnam District, by considering their complaints dated 13-10-2010, 26-10-2010 and 27-10-2010, as illegal and arbitrary. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the subject property was given to the first petitioner by her parents as ‘Pasupu Kunkuma’ and she constructed a building thereon by the financial assistance of the second petitioner, who is her son. It is the grievance of petitioners that though they filed several representations before respondents- Police alleging interference by third parties with their possession of the property in question, no action has been taken. A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by the first respondent-Commissioner of Police. In the counter-affidavit, while denying various allegations made by petitioners, it is stated that a complaint was received against petitioners and basing on the same a case in Cr.No.429/2010 is registered against petitioners and one Smt.D.Bangarupapa, for the offences under Sections 427, 448 and 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 on the file of P.M.Palem Police Station and investigation is in progress. With regard to the allegation of petitioners that there is interference by the Police with their possession of the property in question, in the counter-affidavit, it is stated that there is no interference whatsoever as alleged by petitioners. Though the allegation of petitioners is that respondents- Police are interfering with their possession of the property in question, it is the categorical statement of the respondents- Police that there is no interference whatsoever on their part with the civil disputes and possession of petitioners with regard to the property in question. As is evident from the counter-affidavit, based on a complaint received, a case in Cr.No.429/2010 was registered against petitioners and another and investigation is underway. When a complaint is lodged against petitioners, it is the duty of the Police to register a crime and investigate into the same. As much as it is categorically stated in the counter- affidavit that there is no interference by the respondents-Police with regard to possession of petitioners over the property in question, I dispose of the writ petition placing on record the said statement of the respondents-Police. No costs. However, petitioners are at liberty to avail remedies open under law. ____________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) February 01, 2011 MRR