IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 24929 of 2001 Between: Budde Madhukar S/o Narayana R/o Perkapally, MR. Thiryani, Adilabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Circle Inspector of Police, Thandur Circle MR. Thandur, Adilabad District. 2 Thota Mallaiah S/o T. Kotaiah R/o Narlapur, MR. Mandamarri, Adilabad District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the Respondent No.1 in summoning and calling the petitioner to the Police Circle Office, Thandur Circle, Thandur, Adilabad District, without due process of law as arbitrary, colourable exercise of power, without jurisdiction and violative of Art. 21 of Constitution of India, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.V.SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY W.P.No.24929 of 2001 ORDER: The petitioner feels aggrieved by the alleged action in summoning him frequently to the Police Station. It is stated that taking advantage of some civil dispute between the petitioner and the second respondent, the first respondent is insisting on the petitioner to attend the police station frequently. The first respondent filed a counter stating that the second respondent approached him on 1.11.2001 and submitted a written complaint and to enquire into the same, the petitioner was summoned to police station only once. It is stated that a case in crime No.31/2001 was registered on the basis of the complaint and inasmuch as the enquiry into the same has been concluded, the petitioner would not be called to the Police Station. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home. It is not as if the first respondent summoned the petitioner to Police Station without any basis. A complaint was received from the second respondent and in the process of enquiring into the same, the petitioner was called. A categorical statement is made in the counter affidavit that the petitioner would not be called inasmuch as the enquiry has been completed. Recording the same, the writ petition is closed. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 21-11-2008 Stp ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SRAVAN}