HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.33239 of 2010 Date : 24.01.2011 Between : Alekunta Padma & others. …..Petitioners And The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.33239 of 2010 ORDER : This writ petition is filed, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents 2 to 4 in interfering and insisting the petitioners to settle the civil disputes pending between petitioners and respondents 5 to 8, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioners that the 1st petitioner is the owner of plot bearing No.8, admeasuring 100 sq. yards in Sy.No.66 of Block 4, Navajeevan Nagar, Ferozguda village, Kukatpally Circle, Balanagar Mandal in Ranga Reddy District. Similarly, it is stated that petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are also owners of land admeasuring 90 and 110 sq. yards respectively, in the same survey number. It is stated that when respondents 5 to 8 were interfering with their possession, the petitioners have approached a civil Court by filing different suits, and obtained status quo orders. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioners that inspite of such orders passed by the competent Civil Court, respondents 2 to 4 are threatening the petitioners to settle the disputes with respondents 5 to 8. Based on the written instructions, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader for Home that one Smt.Y.Sandhya Rani W/o.Reddappa Reddy, R/o.Flat No.302, Surya Enclave, Anand Nagar, Khairatabad, Hyderabad, has filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C., before the learned IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, and the same was referred to Police. In the aforesaid complaint, there was an allegation of trespass and demolition of servant quarter by the 1st petitioner and others in her plot admeasuring 400 sq. yards, covered by Sy.No.70 of Ferozguda village. It is stated that based on the reference made by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, a case was registered in Crime No.274/2010 for the offences under Sections 448, 447, 427, 323, 506 r/w.148 I.P.C. on the file of Balanagar Police Station, on 04.10.2010, and the investigation is under progress. It is further stated that the 3rd respondent, being an investigating officer, has issued notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C. to the 1st petitioner to produce necessary documents for the purpose of investigation, but there was no interference or any threat, as contended by the petitioners. It is further stated that no crime is registered so far as petitioners 2 and 3 are concerned. When a private complaint is referred to the Police under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., it is obligatory on the part of Police to register the crime and conduct investigation, but such investigation cannot be construed as interference. As it is stated that the respondents have issued notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C. for the purpose of investigation, and as it is further submitted that they are not threatening the petitioners to settle the disputes with respondents 5 to 8, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, placing on record the statement of the learned Government Pleader that there is no interference by the Police with the rights of petitioners over their properties, and that no directions are issued for settlement of disputes between the petitioners and respondents 5 to 8. However, it is open for respondents 3 and 4 to complete the investigation in Crime No.274/2010 and file the final report as expeditiously as possible. It is also made clear that in this writ petition, no finding is recorded with regard to possession of either the petitioners or the unofficial respondents, over the properties in question. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 24th January 2011 ajr