IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.20081 OF 2010 Between: S. Naqib .....PETITIONER AND The Circle Inspector of Police and others ....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.20081 OF 2010 ORDER: The grievance of the petitioner is that the police authorities, respondent Nos.1 and 2, are interfering in a civil dispute pending between the petitioner and respondent Nos.3 and 4 and summoning him to the police station every day. The petitioner claims to have entered into an agreement with respondent No.3 in respect of purchase of the Saw Mill by name ‘Bhaskara Saw Mill’. He further claims that the Saw Mill licence was also transferred in his name and was valid up to 31.12.2009. It is his case that his application for renewal of the licence is pending and that during the processing of the same, he is entitled to operate the Saw Mill. While so, it is alleged that his vendor, respondent No.3, and his son, respondent No.4, approached the police authorities and instigated them to harass the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, it is alleged that the police, respondent Nos.1 and 2, were sending constables to the petitioner’s residence time and again, threatening to shut down his Saw Mill. Hence, this Writ Petition. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Government Pleader for Home placed before the Court the written instructions dated 21.08.2010 of the Station House Officer, Irala Police Station, Chittoor District, wherein it is stated that no complaint whatsoever was received or registered against the petitioner and that the petitioner was not summoned to the police station. It was denied that any constables were sent to the petitioner and that he was threatened with closure of the Saw Mill. Sri K. Rama Mohan Mahadeva, learned counsel for the petitioner, disputed the stand put forth by the Station House Officer, Irala Police Station. It is his case that in spite of filing of this Writ Petition, respondent Nos.1 and 2 were still continuing with their interference in the matter by sending constables to the petitioner. However, the learned counsel said that as respondent Nos.1 and 2 had committed themselves by way of written instructions, the same may be recorded while disposing of the Writ Petition with appropriate orders. In the light of the stand reflected in the written instructions, the police authorities, as admitted by the Station House Officer, Irala Police Station, have no role to play in what appears to be purely a civil dispute between the petitioner and respondent Nos.3 and 4. Unless there is any allegation that an offence has been committed punishable under criminal law, the role of the police authorities does not arise. As it is categorically stated that no complaint has been received or registered against the petitioner, it is clear that respondent Nos.1 and 2 have no authority to interfere with the life, liberty and property of the petitioner. Recording the stand reflected in the written instructions of the Station House Officer, Irala Police Station, Chittoor District, this Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR August 23, 2010 Note: Issue C.C. in four days. B/O.MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.20081 OF 2010 August 23, 2010