THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.31606 OF 2011 ORDER: Alleging that respondent Nos.3 and 4 were repeatedly calling the petitioner to the police station, and insisting that he deposit Rs.4,35,757/-, allegedly misappropriated by him from the office of the fifth respondent, the present Writ Petition is filed. It is the petitioner's case that one Sri M. Haribabu who was the Junior Assistant in the office of the fifth respondent had misappropriated the said amount deposited towards Provident Fund dues of teachers; based on the complaint made by the fifth respondent Crime No.52 of 2004 was registered against Sri M. Haribabu for the offence under Section 409 I.P.C.; and he was falsely implicated in the said crime necessitating his having to file Criminal Petition No.4881 of 2004 seeking anticipatory bail, which was allowed by order dated 29.10.2004. It is the petitioner’s grievance that, on 25.11.2011, the police officials have come over to his residence, and were insisting that he come and repay the said amount though it was not he but Sri M. Haribabu who had misappropriated the amount. A counter affidavit is filed by the third respondent wherein it is stated that Crime No.52 of 2004 was registered against the petitioner for misappropriation of funds of the Mandal Parishad to a tune of Rs.4,35,757; and, thereafter, a charge sheet was also filed before the Second Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ongole, wherein the petitioner was shown as A1. The third respondent would deny the petitioner’s allegation of his being asked to come over to the police station, and being forced to repay the amount allegedly misappropriated. It is further stated that the petitioner is not required in any case registered on the file of the Tangutur Police Station, including Crime No.52 of 2004, since a charge sheet has already been filed against the petitioner, and the matter is pending trial. A similar counter affidavit is filed by the fourth respondent also. Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, would submit that after the Writ Petition was filed, the petitioner is no longer being called to the police station. In the light of the assertions in the counter affidavits, and in view of the submissions made across the bar by the Learned Counsel for the petitioner, I see no reason to keep the Writ Petition pending on the file of this Court. Suffice to record the averments in the counter affidavits that the petitioner is not required in connection with any complaint pending on the file of the Tangutur Police Station, including Crime No.54 of 2004 in which a charge sheet has already been filed. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, closed. However, in the circumstances, without costs. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J December 20, 2011 MD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.31606 OF 2011 December 20, 2011 MD