IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OFAPRIL, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION No.755 of 2008 Between: Shaik Kandukuri Nizamuddin. … Petitioner And The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Anantapur and seven others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri T.Niranjan Reddy for Sri T.Nagarjuna Reddy Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home for R.1 to R.3. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition relates to the alleged interference by respondent No.3 in the civil disputes between the petitioner on one side and respondents 4 to 8 on the other with regard to Ac.1.82 cents of land comprised in Survey No.15/1 A,B,C, and D of Chinnamokkapally village, Rayachoti Sub-Division, Cuddapah District. At the hearing, Sri T.Niranjan Reddy, learned counsel representing the petitioner, submitted that with respect to the above mentioned property, the petitioner filed O.S.No.115 of 2005 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Rayachoti, Cuddapah District, and in I.A.No.500 of 2005 the said Court granted temporary injunction in favour of the petitioner on 8-9- 2005 restraining respondent No.4 from interfering with the said property. He also submitted that while the civil disputes are pending, respondent No.4, along with respondents 5 to 8, approached respondent No.3 and influenced him to interfere in the property in dispute; that in the last week of December, 2007 respondent No.3 called the petitioner to Police Station and asked him to withdraw the said suit; and that after keeping quiet for some time, on the petitioner informing respondent No.3 that the dispute is purely of civil nature, he again started sending his subordinates to the petitioner summoning him to the Police Station; and that he sent representation dated 10-1-2008 to respondents 1 and 2 against the unlawful interference by respondent No.3 in the civil litigation. As no action was taken on the said representation, he filed the present Writ Petition. No counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of respondents 4 to 8. A counter-affidavit is filed by respondent No.3, wherein he categorically denied interference in civil disputes. He further averred that Crime No.19 of 2008 was registered against the petitioner under Sections 406 and 420 IPC on the complaint given by respondent No.5 and the same is pending investigation. In view of the categorical denial of interference in civil dispute by respondent No.3, the Writ Petition is disposed of placing the said averment on record. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J 28-4-2008 MNR