IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 6885 of 2009 Between: Shoeb Bin Abdullah S/o.Abdullah Bin Omer Syed Hassan R/o.H.No.17-3-198/6, Madina Nagar, Yakutpura, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad having office at Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 2 The D.C.P. South Zone DCP Office, Chatta Bazar, Hyderabad. 3 The Inspector of Police, P.S. Bhavanenagar, Bhavani Nagar, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to pass an order, direction or a writ particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the action of the respondents of harassing the petitioner and restraining the petitioner from working for M.B.T. as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional consequently this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner in any manner whatsoever. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MOHAMMED ADAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : Order: The petitioner is an advocate. He filed this writ petition stating that he was appointed as a Public Relation Officer to regional political party – Majlis Bachao Tahreeq (MBT) in the ensuing elections and due to that the respondents are harassing and threatening to arrest him. In response to the notice issued by this Court on 1.4.2009, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents today submitted that two cases viz., Cr.No.41 of 2009 under Sections 188, 291 IPC and Cr.No.47 of 2009 under Sections 353, 506, 188, 291 IPC read with 34 IPC on the file of Moghalpura Police Station as well as Bhavaninagar Police Station were registered against the petitioner on 28.3.2009 and investigation into the said crimes is pending and to divert the attention of the Investigating Officer, the petitioner filed this writ petition levelling baseless allegations against the respondent police. None appeared for the petitioner. There is no representation. In view of the above submission made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that two cases are registered against the petitioner and the same are pending investigation, the relief sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition cannot be granted. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondents in trying to arrest him in connection with the said crimes, he is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum seeking the relief. The writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.27.4.2009 msv