THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.26850 of 2009 Dated:09.12.2009 Between: Satti Veera Raghava Reddy and another. .. Petitioners. And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Superintendent of Police, East Godavari District, Kakinada, and others. .. Respondents. ORDER: The petitioners claim to be the owners of the agricultural lands totally admeasuring Ac.6.05 cents in various survey numbers of Dangeru village, K.Gangavaram Mandal, East Godavari District, having purchased the same under two separate sale deeds dated 12.10.2009, for a valid consideration, from one K.Sundara Rama Reddy basing on the registered G.P.As. dated 16.07.2008 and 04.08.2008 executed by Ravipati Nagendrabhushan Vara Prasad and his wife Ravipati Vijayalakshmi, and since then they have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the same. It is the case of the petitioners that subsequent to their purchase, their vendors, Ravipati Nagendrabhushan Vara Prasad and his wife Ravipati Vijayalakshmi, with an evil intention to grab the schedule land, got filed a tenancy case being ATC No.3 of 2009 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari District, by the 5th respondent, alleging that the 5th respondent is a tenant of the schedule land, and obtained ex parte injunction. It is the further case of the petitioners that the 5th respondent, without impleading them as party to the said ATC, on the guise of the injunction orders, trying to interfere with their possession and enjoyment. The grievance of the petitioners is that the respondents 2 to 4, at the instance of the 5th respondent, are interfering in the civil disputes and making them to sit in the police station from morning to evening, without there being any crime registered against them and, hence, they filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for Home. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondents are interfering with the petitioners’ personal life and liberty, even without there being any crime registered against them. If any complaint is received by the police, it is for the police to register a case, investigate into the matter and submit a final report as provided for under Section 173 Cr.P.C. Here, according to the petitioners, the respondents have so far not registered any crime against them, but they are directing them to come to the police station and making them to sit in the police station for hours together. Therefore, in my considered view, the respondents 2 to 4 have no business to interfere with the personal life and liberty of petitioners, without following the due process of law, and the action of the respondents 2 to 4 is contrary to the principles of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, with a direction to the respondents 2 to 4 not to interfere with the personal life and liberty of the petitioners, without following the due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J 09.12.2009 Note: Furnish CC in three days B/o v v