IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26200 of 2008 Between: Gorlapally Srinivas S/o. Late Durgaiah R/o.1-86, Village: Chakepalli, Bellampally Mandal, Adilabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Adilabad District. 2 The Station House Officer, Sirpur Kagaznagar, Adilabad District. 3 The M.M. Bari, Circle Inspector of Police, Sirpur Kagaznagar Police Station, Adilabad District. 4 The U. Venkama, Sub Inspector of Police, Sirpur Kagaznagar Police Station, Adilabad District. 5 G. Trishulla W/o. G. Srinivas ESI Hospital R/o.2-5-763, New Colony, Kagaznagar, Adilabad District.s .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.A.SHAKEEL Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2:AGP FOR HOME ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to direct respondent No.1 to take appropriate action against respondent Nos.3 and 4. The petitioner, who is the husband of respondent No.5 and having serious matrimonial disputes with her, made serious allegations against respondent Nos.3 and 4 of interfering with his privacy and threatening his life and liberty. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.3, who is made eonomine party along with the Sub-Inspector of Police, Sirpur Kagaznagar, Adilabad District, he categorically denied such interference. It is specifically stated in paragraph 12 that there is no threat from any corner including respondent No.5 to the petitioner and that at present, no case is pending against him in any one of the Police Stations in Adilabad District. It is also specifically stated that the police neither threatened nor summoned the petitioner to the police station at any point of time, except for the purpose of counselling the parties on two occasions. In view of the categorical assertion made by respondent No.3 that he or any other police of Adilabad District have not been interfering with the life and personal liberty of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to seek revival of this writ petition in the event any harassment is meted out to him by the police of Adilabad District in future. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.34302 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 3rd JUNE, 2009. kvni