IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 19027 of 2008 Between: 1 Goguladinne Sai Vijaya Bharat S/o. Venkata Rama Swamy Reddy M.T.S. Railway Colony, Near Karwar Road, HUBLI, Karnataka State, Presently at House No. 13-140, Near Reddemma's House, Vidya Nagar, Eluru, W.G. District. 2 Goguladinne Venkata Rama Swamy Reddy S/o. Venkatayya House No. 13-140, Near Reddemma's House, Vidya Nagar, Eluru, W.G. District. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Superilntendent of Police, Khammam District, Khammam. 2 The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Khammam Sub Division, Khammam, Khammam District. 3 The Circle Inspector of Police, Khammam Circle, Khammam. 4 The Sub Inspector of Police, II Town (Law & Order) Police Station, Khammam District. 5 N. Divi Sundari W/o. G. Sai Vijaya Bharath R/o. D.No. 6-3-66, Bank Colony, Near By-Pass Road Khammam, Khammam District. 6 Lakkireddy Varalakshmi R/o. D.No. 6-3-66, Bank Colony, Near By-Pass Road Khammam, Khammam 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 direction order or orders more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th Respondent in summoning the petitioners to the Police Station frequently without there being any crime against them as illegal, arbitrary, malaﬁde, ultra virus and in violation of article 21 of constitution of India and consequentially direct the respondents 1 to 4 not to interfere with their person liberty and day to day life in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MRKAMBHAMPATI RAMESH BABU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. RAMULU W.P. No. 19027 of 2008 O R D E R: This writ petition is ﬁled complaining that the Police are interfering with the life and personal liberty of the petitioner without there being any crime registered or pending against him. While issuing notice before admission on 2.9.2008, 4th respondent was directed not to interfere with the personal liberty of the petitioner without following due process of law. Now a counter aﬃdavit has been ﬁled by 4 th respondent stating that he never called the petitioner to the police station and the said allegation is false. He further denied the allegation that he telephoned the petitioner on 29.8.2008 and threatened him with dire consequences. Under those circumstances and in view of the orders passed by this Court on 2.9.2008, nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ petition. It is accordingly closed. C.V. RAMULU, J. Date: 17-11-2008. MVB.