IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 6499 of 2002 Between: K,Suryanaryana Sastri S/o Late K.Venkateshwarulu 1-1-336/124, Chikkadapally, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The SHO, Chikkadapally Police Station, Chikkadapally, Hyd. 2 The Dy. Commissioner of Police, (East Zone), Hyd. 3 The Asst Commissioner of Police, Chikkadapally Division, Hyd. 4 The Dir General of Police, Lakdikapool, Govt of A.P., Hyd. 5 K.Aditya S/o Late K.Lakshmi Prasad Plot No.1 Surya Nivas, SBI Colony, Kothapeta, Saroornagar, RR Dist. 6 K.Ashwin S/o Late K.Lakshmi Prasad 1024, Sanjacinto Drive, Irving Texox, USA, Pin 75063. 7 Sai S/o P.Parameshwar Rao C/o K.Aditya, S/o Late K.Lakshmi Prasad, SBI Colony, Plot No.1 Surya Nivas,Kothapeta, Saroornagar, RR Dist. 8 K.Subba Lakshmi @ Vimala W/o late K.Lakshmi Prasad, SBI Colony, Plot No.1 Surya Nivas,Kothapeta, Saroornagar, RR Dist. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS DIRECTING the R1 to book an FIR against the R5 to 8 as per the complaint of the petitioner given to the R1 on 26-3-2002 & 28-3-2002 for the offences committed by them, after declaring the action of the R1in not booking FIR immediately on receipt of the complaint as illegal, arbitrary & against Prl of law, & consequently to direct the R1 to investigation into the complaint & to see that the culprits are punished for their inhuman behaviour & for the offences committed by them in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.B.SUDHAKAR REDDY & NEERAJA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed aggrieved by the alleged inaction on the part of the 1st respondent-Station House Officer, Chikkadpalli police station in taking action against the respondents 5 to 8 on the basis of the complaints, dated 26-03-2002 and 28-03-2002, lodged by the petitioner. 2. In response to the Rule Nisi ordered on 28-08-2002 the Sub-Inspector of police, Police Station, Chikkadpalli filed counter- affidavit stating that on receipt of the complaints from the petitioner an entry was made in the general diary maintained in the police station and necessary enquiry was made in which it was found that the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents 5 to 8 were purely civil in nature. Accordingly, petitioner as well as the respondents 5 to 8 were advised to work out the appropriate remedy in the competent civil Court. 3. The stand taken by the 1st respondent in the counter affidavit has not been controverted by the petitioner. In the circumstances, no further enquiry is necessary. 4. Accordingly, Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (G. ROHINI, J) 03rd February, 2009. Tsy To 1 The SHO, Chikkadapally Police Station, Chikkadapally, Hyd. 2 The Dy. Commissioner of Police, (East Zone), Hyd. 3 The Asst Commissioner of Police, Chikkadapally Division, Hyd. 4 The Dir General of Police, Lakdikapool, Govt of A.P., Hyd. 5 Two CCs 6 Two CD Copies