THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6567 of 2010 Date: 20.4.2010 Between: Smt. Ditti Jaya Lakshmi, and others. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Asst. Commissioner of Police and others. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners : Not present Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2: Asst. Govt. Pleader for Home The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 6567 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in not receiving the complaint of the petitioners and in not registering a case against respondent Nos. 3 to 5, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners sought for a direction to respondent No.2 to provide police protection to them and their G.P.A. holder. At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioners. I have heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and perused the record. The averments contained in the affidavit disclose that certain civil disputes are pending between the petitioners and certain third parties in respect of 300 sq. yards of land in Plot No.102/A2/P1 and 1.00 acre in Survey No.179 part of Bachupalli Village, Ranga Reddy District. The petitioners also claimed to have instituted a suit in O.S. No. 1477 of 2008 in that regard and obtained an injunction in the said suit, apart from filing a Land Grabbing Case against respondent Nos.3 and 4 in the Special Court under the A.P. Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982. The petitioners also filed Writ Petition No.3422 of 2010 seeking direction to the Qutbullapur Gram Panchayat to demolish the alleged illegal constructions made by respondent No.5. According to the petitioners, on 8.3.2010, respondent Nos. 3 to 5 attacked the G.P.A. Holder of the petitioners with deadly weapons, talwars and sticks and threatened him for filing W.P. No.3422 of 2010. The petitioners alleged that when they have approached respondent No.2 to file a complaint and for police protection, he allegedly refused to receive the same on the ground that a civil suit is pending. The petitioners alleged that subsequent attempts made twice by approaching respondent No.2 to receive the complaint also proved futile. Therefore, they filed the present writ petition. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submitted that when the petitioners approached respondent No.2 with the above mentioned complaint, they were asked to furnish relevant material and that as they failed to turn up later, no case could be registered. In my opinion, respondent No.2 is bound to act on the report given by any person on the allegations of commission of an offence. After making G.D. entry, the case has to be registered if the Station House Officer is satisfied that the contents of the report disclose commission of a cognizable offence. Respondent No.2, is therefore, directed to examine the contents of the report stated to have been field by the petitioners. If no such report is available, he shall consider the allegations contained in the affidavit in this writ petition. If respondent No.2 is satisfied that commission of a cognizable offence is disclosed from the allegations, he shall register a case. The petitioners shall be free to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate with a complaint under Section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, if respondent No.2 does not register a case. As regards the petitioners’ claim for protection, respondent No.2 shall examine the same and take a decision thereon. If he is reasonably satisfied that there is danger to the lives of the petitioners, he shall take appropriate steps to prevent causing of harm to the lives of the petitioners by the third parties, including respondent Nos.3 to 5 . Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. __________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY,J DATE: 20th April, 2010 pnb