IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 25585 of 2007 Between: Hariram Prajapathi, S/o Late Ganesh Ramji Prajapathi, R/o D.No.2-68, Lingojiguda, Saroornagar, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House Officer, Neredmet Police Station, Cyberabad, Hyderabad. 2 The Station House Officer, Kushaiguda Police Station, Cyberabad, Hyderabad. 3 The Station House Officer, Central Crime Station, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.A.PRABHAKAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in harassing the petitioner and his employees physically and mentally on the purported ground that the petitioner is purchasing stolen gold and silver articles, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard Sri A.Prabhakar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and perused the record. No counter-affidavit is filed by the respondents. This Court on 04.12.2007 passed an order directing the respondents not to harass the petitioner while permitting them to make investigation into the complaint, if any received against the petitioner. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home reported no instructions. If the respondents are of the view that the petitioner is buying stolen gold and silver articles, it is incumbent upon them to register cases and investigate. However, in the guise of suspecting the petitioner, the respondents cannot interfere with the life and personal liberty of the petitioner. Such a conduct is not permissible in law. Hence, the respondents are directed not to interfere with the life and personal liberty of the petitioner unless on the basis of the complaints received against the petitioner disclosing commission of cognizable offences, they register cases against him in accordance with law. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.33329 of 2007 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 28th APRIL, 2008 kvni