IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 7109 of 2008 Between: Mandala Mohan Reddy S/o.Janardhan Reddy R/o.Q No.T-2 196, Centenary Colony Kamanoor(M) Karimnagar Dist ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police Karimnagar Dist 2 The Station House Officer Jammikunta Police Station Karimnagar Dist 3 The Circle Inspector of Police Jammikunta Karimnagar Dist 4 Kandi Deleep Reddy S/o.Bucha Reddy R/o.Vanthadupula(V) Jammikunta(M) Karimnagar Dist 5 Mandala Narotham Reddy S/o.Papi Reddy R/o.Komati Pally of Mogellapally(M) Warangal Dist .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.S.SATYAM REDDY Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME Counsel for Respondent Nos.4 and 5: None appeared The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in illegally detaining the petitioner in the Police Station and visiting the houses of the petitioner, his relatives and friends and forcing the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- for settlement of civil dispute between him and respondent No.4 as illegal and unconstitutional. In his affidavit, the petitioner stated that in connection with granite business started by the petitioner and respondent No.4, disputes arose leading to execution of a promissory note by the petitioner in favour of respondent No.4 for Rs.1,80,000/- on 24-07-2006. The petitioner averred that in connection with the said dispute, respondent No.2 summoned the petitioner to the Police Station on 07-03-2008 to settle the said dispute with respondent No.4, and when the petitioner went to the Police Station, respondent No.2 was not present there, and on the evening of the same day, respondent No.2 telephoned to his friend and the surety under the promissory note, and demanded him to deposit the promissory note amount of Rs.1,80,000/-. The petitioner further alleged that on 25-03-2008, respondent Nos.2 and 3 summoned him to the Police Station and demanded him to pay the amount of Rs.1,80,000/-, and when he tried to convince them that it was a civil dispute, they did not refrain from interfering with the same, and on 26-03-2008, a Constable came to the petitioner’s house at 8.00 a.m., and took him to the Jammikunta Police Station, where he was thrown into the lock up of the Police Station from 6 p.m., to 10 p.m., and was let off at 10 p.m., with instructions to come with money on or before 31st March, 2008. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submitted that respondent Nos.2 and 3 have not interfered with the petitioner’s life and liberty, and that on the complaint given by respondent No.4 against the petitioner, they made an entry in the General Diary, and after a preliminary investigation, they advised respondent No.4 to approach civil Court, as the complaint related to a civil dispute. The learned Assistant Government Pleader further stated that the petitioner was not detained in the Police Station and respondent Nos.2 and 3 are not interfering with his liberty. In view of the statement made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed not to interfere with the petitioner’s life and personal liberty in connection with the civil dispute between him and respondent No.4. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.9329 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is also disposed of as infructuous. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 9th April, 2008 lur