THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.31365 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed with the prayer, which reads as under: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing respondent No.1 not to interfere with the civil disputes more particularly with the Schedule Property House Plot No.1-112/75/1, admeasuring 500 sq.yards in Sy.No.69 (Part-D) at Miyapur Village, Serilingampally Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 21 of Constitution of India and Rule of Law.” It is the grievance of the petitioner that though there is a civil dispute with regard to house plot bearing No.1-112/75/1, admeasuring 500 sq.yards, in Survey No.69 (Part-D) at Miyapur Village, Serilingampally Municipality, Ranga Reddy District, between her and the sixth respondent, there is an interference by the first respondent – Station House Officer, Miyapur Police Station of Cyberabad Commissionerate, in the absence of any crime registered against her. It is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 to 5, based on the written instructions, dated 20.12.2010, that the sixth respondent has filed a private complaint before the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, against the petitioner, her husband and others stating that the persons named in the complaint criminally trespassed into his property admeasuring 348 sq.yards equivalent to 290.92 sq.meters covered by Survey Nos.69/B and 69/D situated at Miyapur Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It is further submitted that based on the complaint referred to by the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, a case in Crime No.399 of 2010 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 323, 441, 447, 427, 464, 468, 471 and 506 IPC on the file of Miyapur Police Station on 18.09.2010 and investigation was made. It is further submitted that the petitioner and her husband were shown as A.1 and A.9 in the said crime. It is also submitted that investigation disclosed that all the accused, A.2 to A.8, except A.1 and A.9, committed the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC, as such, their names were deleted from the accused column and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, on 15.12.2010. On reference of a private complaint submitted by the sixth respondent to the police, it is the duty of respondents 1 to 5 to conduct investigation and submit final report. As much as it is stated that the investigation conducted in the aforesaid crime disclosed that no case is made out against the petitioner and her husband, as such, their names were deleted from the accused column, it cannot be said that there is interference by respondents 1 to 5. In that view of the matter, placing on record such statement made on behalf of respondents 1 to 5, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondents 1 to 5 not to interfere in civil disputes between the petitioner and the sixth respondent. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 20th DECEMBER, 2010. kvni