IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10857 of 2009 Between: Sardar Bhagath Singh S/o. Late Sardar Mohan Singh R/o. H.No.8-3-502/1/3, Sanjay Gandhi Near, Yellareddyguda, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Panjagutta, Hyderabad. 2 The Station House Officer, S.R. Nagar Police Station, Hyderabad. ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SHAIK JILANI Counsel for the Respondent No.: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following : O R D E R: In this writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that though respondent No.2 registered Crime Nos.573 and 650 of 2009 against the petitioner’s brother by name, Sardar Balwanth Singh that he was unduly interfering with the petitioner’s possession of House No.7-1-166, the police have not been taking action against him and completing the investigation. The petitioner pleaded that he filed O.S.No.3459 of 2004 on the file of V-Junior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, which was dismissed; that A.S.No.332 of 2007 filed by him before the Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, against the said judgment and decree was allowed and judgment and decree dated 19-01-2009 was passed holding that the petitioner is the lawful owner of the said plot and that in S.A.No.124 of 2009 filed by the petitioner’s brother, this Court granted status quo order on 20-02-2009. The petitioner averred that in spite of the said order of status quo, the petitioner’s brother and his son are obstructing his lawful possession. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.2, it is stated that Crime No.573 of 2009 was registered for the offences under Sections 341 and 506 IPC on the complaint given by the petitioner, on 26-04- 2009, that his brother was causing obstruction to the house and open place and that a similar complaint was given by him on 12-05-2009 also, on which Crime No.650 of 2009 was registered. It is further stated that investigation in both the crimes is actively in progress and the same will be completed, as expeditiously as possible, and appropriate reports will be filed before the jurisdictional Magistrate. Since the nature of the complaints is not complex, requiring substantial time for the police to complete the investigation and file appropriate reports, I do not find justification for respondent No.2 in not completing the investigation and filing reports before the jurisdictional Magistrate with expedition. Respondent No.2 is, therefore, directed to complete the investigation and file appropriate reports in both the cases, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.13954 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 25th June, 2009 vrn