THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.7497 OF 2010 Dated 7th April, 2010 Between: Rayana Chamundeswari …Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh and another …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarty Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home The Court made the following ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in closing FIR No.126 of 2010 on the file of respondent No.2 without securing the particulars regarding identity of the accused in the crime by name Amit Sharma as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner sought for a direction to the respondents to investigate into FIR No.126 of 2010. I have heard Sri Sai Gangadhar Chamarty, learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. The petitioner’s daughter is stated to have been found missing. On the petitioner reporting the same, respondent No.2 registered FIR No.126 of 2010 dated 09.03.2010 under the head “girl missing”. In her affidavit, the petitioner stated that she has received information from respondent No.2 that her daughter left for Bihar with a person by name Amit Sharma. She also states that her daughter and the said Amit Sharma are majors and that on account of the same, respondent No.2 has closed the crime. The only grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.2 has not collected the details of the said Amit Sharma and furnished the same to her. In my opinion, when the police on investigation are satisfied that no offence was committed, they have no option other than submitting an appropriate report before the Magistrate concerned. According to the petitioner, respondent No.2 has closed the crime, which necessarily implies that a report would have been filed before the Magistrate or is in the process of being filed. This being the admitted position, it is not possible for this Court to direct respondent No.2 to collect the details of the person whom the petitioner’s daughter has married because the act of marriage does not constitute an offence, as both of them are majors. However, in the interests of justice, respondent No.2 is directed to furnish to the petitioner all the details, which he would have collected during the course of investigation regarding the person whom the petitioner’s daughter has married, on the petitioner approaching him. Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.9655 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 7th April, 2010 vrn