THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.941 of 2011 ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed alleging that the respondent has violated the directions issued by this Court in order, dated 20.12.2010, passed in Writ Petition No.30867 of 2010. In the aforesaid Writ Petition, it was the grievance of the petitioner that in spite of lodging complaint before the police with regard to theft of his lorry bearing No.AP36 Y 3432, the respondent - police is not acting upon it. The petitioner lodged complaint against Sri Ram Transport and Finance Company Limited, Anantapur, from which, he has availed finance for purchase of that vehicle. Without impleading such Finance Company as party to the proceedings, the Writ Petition was filed. This Court on noticing that Sri Ram Transport and Finance Company Limited was not a party to the Writ Petition, through its order, dated 20.12.2010, permitted the petitioner to file another copy of the complaint before the respondent and directed the said Officer to verify the same and take appropriate steps. The respondent filed a detailed counter-affidavit along with relevant material papers, a perusal of which shows that there was a complaint filed by the aforesaid Company under Section 200 Cr.P.C. against two individuals before the learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Anantapur, who in turn, referred the same to the police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and the police registered it in Crime No.406 of 2010 for the offences under Sections 420, 424, 427, 405, 473, 482, 307 IPC read with 506 IPC. It is stated that in that connection, enquiry was conducted and the petitioner colluded with the said accused and tampered the chassis number of the vehicle. A report is also enclosed to say that such seizure was effected in terms of the conditions of agreement and that no case is made out by the petitioner in the complaint lodged by him with regard to alleged theft of aforesaid lorry. In order, dated 20.12.2010, passed by this Court, there is no direction to the respondent for registration of a crime. In the absence of any positive direction issued by this Court, in view of the explanation offered by the respondent in the counter-affidavit, this Court is convinced that the respondent has not violated the directions of this Court attracting the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The Contempt Case is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 17th AUGUST, 2011. kvni