IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 12719 of 2008 Between: V.N.V.D.V Prasad@ Prasad S/o.Naga Venkata Subrahmanya Sarma Undrjavaram(M) East Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of A.P rep.by its Secretary Home Department Seretariat Buildings Hyderabad 2 The Sub Inspector of Police Nidadavole P.S West Godavari District .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 particularly a writ in the nature of Mandamus declare the action of the 2nd respondent in harassing the petitioner without there being any new complaint or New Crime against him as illegal without jurisdiction arbitrary and violative of Fundamental Rights Guaranteed Under Article 21 and 22 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent his staff not to harrassing the petitioner and pass Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. B.VENKATADRI Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.12719 OF 2008 ORDER : This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a declaration that the alleged action of the 2nd respondent – Sub-Inspector of Police, Nidadavoloe P.S., West Godavari District in harassing the petitioner without there being any complaint pending against the petitioner as arbitrary and illegal. The 2nd respondent – Sub-Inspector of Police, Nidadavole P.S., West Godavari District ﬁled a counter-aﬃdavit denying the allegations and stating that the petitioner is not at all required in any crime on the ﬁle of Nidadavole P.S. The fact that in Cr.No.91 of 2006 which was registered against the petitioner earlier, the investigation was already completed and a charge-sheet was ﬁled in the Court of II-Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kovvuru, and the same is pending as C.C.No.508 of 2006 is not disputed. Having regard to the version of the respondents in the counter-aﬃdavit which stood unrebutted, no further enquiry is necessary. Accordingly, recording the statement of the 2 nd respondent in his counter-aﬃdavit, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to interfere with personal liberty of the petitioner in any manner whatsoever without following due process of law. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 08.09.2008 gbs