IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.64 of 2005 Between: Mr. Jetla Ravi, S/o. Narayana, R/o. Shivaji Nagar, Godavarikhani, Ramagundam Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Karimnagar, Karimnagar District. 2 The Station HOuse Officer, Godavarikhani II-Town Police Station, Karimnagar District. 3 Mr. Gaddam Mallaiah, S/o. Chantaiah, R/o. Gaddampally Village, Sundilla Post, Kamanpur Mandal, Karimnagar 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 of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondents by calling the petitioenr to the police station without there being any crime registered against him at the behest of the third respondent as being arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and issue consequential directions directing the respondents not to harass the petitioner by calling him to police station without following the due process of law and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.D.BHASKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.64 of 2005 ORDER: Petitioner seeks to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in calling the petitioner to the police station without there being any crime registered against him at the behest of the 3rd respondent as illegal and arbitrary. A counter has been filed stating that petitioner is the son-in-law of the 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent lodged a complaint stating the petitioner had taken a loan amount of Rs.2,50,000/- for business and when the 3rd respondent asked the petitioner for repayment of loan amount, the petitioner indiscriminately beat and abused the 3rd respondent with filthy language. Basing on the said complaint a Petty Case No.186 of 2004 for the offences punishable under Section 290 and 323 IPC was registered against the petitioner on 27-11-2004. The Judicial First Class Magistrate, Godavarikhani issued summons and directed the 2nd respondent to serve the summons on the petitioner but the petitioner is absconding from the village from the date of offence. Admittedly, the petitioner has not questioned the registration of Petty Case No.186 of 2004. Further, the police stated that they never harassed the petitioner at any point of time but they only filed Petty Case basing on the complaint filed by the 3rd respondent. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled for any relief in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 24-04-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SPJS}