HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD Criminal Petition No.3357 of 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri D. Madhava Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri G. Srinivas, learned counsel representing Sri D. Chaitanya, learned counsel for the first respondent and Sri A. Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor for the second respondent. Sri D. Madhava Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners in his usual fairness has brought to notice that the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Guntur, permitted the investigating officer to refer the case in Cr.No.80 of 2009 as non-cognizable and that a final report accordingly had been filed by the investigating officer before the court, which is under consideration of the court. Sri G. Srinivas, learned counsel, represented that the first respondent filed a protest petition against the final report before the trial court. While it is for the learned Magistrate to determine what further action is to be taken in accordance with law on merits on the final report or the protest petition insofar as this criminal petition is concerned, which is only to quash the further proceedings in Cr.No.80 of 2009 on the file of Old Guntur Police Station, the same has become superfluous, if not, infructuous. While the petitioners and the first respondent will be at liberty to pursue all their remedies in accordance with law in respect of any further proceedings arising out of either the final report submitted by the police or the protest petition filed by the first respondent, this criminal petition need not be kept pending. It should also be clarified that the dismissal of this criminal petition will have no bearing on the merits of the rival contentions in any such future proceedings. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed as infructuous. _____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 11-09-2009 Ksn