THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.8301 OF 2010 Dated 15th April, 2010 Between: U.Erranna and 5 others …Petitioners And The Superintendent of Police, Hyderabad and 3 others. …Respondents Counsel for the petitioners : Sri B.Sarvotham Reddy Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home The Court made the following: Order: In this Writ Petition, the grievance of the petitioners is that in the guise of pendency of two criminal cases registered under the Andhra Pradesh Gaming Act (for short ‘the Act’), respondent No.4 is unduly interfering with their life and personal liberty. The petitioners pleaded that respondent No.4 registered a criminal case under Section 9(1) of the Act against petitioner No.1 in the year 2005 and that a similar case was registered against him 3 days later. It is the case of the petitioners that not being able to withstand the harassment being meted out by the Police, they have shifted their residence to Bellari and started business in tours and travels; that the two criminal cases were taken cognizance by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Adoni, as STC.Nos.232 of 2005 and 27 of 2006 and that the said cases are pending before the said Court. According to the petitioners, no other case is pending against them, but respondent No.4 is visiting their house and insisting on petitioner No.1 to come to Police Station as the superior Police Officers have given directions to register cases under the Act. In my opinion, the Police shall not unduly interfere with the life and personal liberty of any citizen unless such interference is necessary in connection with investigation into the criminal cases or to prevent persons from indulging in anti-social activities. If the petitioners’ plea that they are not involved in commission of fresh offences is correct, the respondents shall not interfere with their life and personal liberty. If the respondents find that any of the petitioners indulged in commission of fresh offences, they are entitled to register cases and prosecute them. However, without such registration of cases, the respondents shall not harass the petitioners. Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.10695 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 15th April, 2010 lur