HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 13818 OF 2007 DATE: 16.7.2007 Between: Gurram Prameela W/o Vasudeva Reddy …Petitioner AND 1. The Station House Oficer, Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Ranga Reddy District and one another ….Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 13818 OF 2007 ORAL ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that she is the owner of an extent of Ac. 2.04 guntas in S.No. 125/A and after excluding roads, she got the land of 6664 sq. yards, situated at Gurramguda Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. As there was a dispute with regard to the title, she filed a Civil Suit O.S.No. 361 of 2002, on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge, L.B.Nagar, against her own sister Kalavathi. It is stated that the petitioner and two other sisters have got their separate holdings and there is similar dispute with regard to the common land. It is the case of the petitioner that she has sold the land covered under Plot No. 33 to Mr. Ananta Reddy on 28.11.1990 and the land covered under Plot No. 34 to Mr. Chandra Reddy and Mr. Bhopal Reddy. It is stated that her sister Yadamma, started interference and therefore, she lodged a complaint against her sister Yadamma. But the police instead of taking action against the said Yadamma, unnecessarily are calling the petitioner to the Police Station and interfering with their civil disputes. The Station House Officer, Vanasthalipuram Police Station, first respondent herein, filed a counter stating that one Mr. M. Bhoopal Reddy, who purchased Plot No. 34, admeasuring 307 sq. yards from the petitioner, filed a complaint stating that Yadamma is interfering with their peaceful possession and enjoyment. Basing on the said compliant a case in Crime No. 831 of 2006 under sections 447, 427 IPC, was registered on 5.12.2006 and investigation was taken up by the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police. It is stated that there is a land dispute between the petitioner and her sister Yadamma but so far the name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the FIR, but during the course of investigation and interrogation made as per evidence collected, it is stated that the involvement of the petitioner was also elicited. As on today, the petitioner was not figured as accused. In view of the averments made in the counter, when there was no complaint against the petitioner, I am of the opinion that there is no justification on the part of the first respondent to interfere with the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and her sister Yadamma and even the complaint is also not made against the petitioner. If that be so, it is not just and proper to the police to interfere with the civil dispute, however, as the name of the petitioner has not figured as accused as on today, no orders are required to be passed in the Writ Petition and accordingly, the same is closed. No order as to costs. ____________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J Date: 16.07.2007 KA