IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.3154 of 2009 Between: S. Mohan Reddy S/o. Laxma Reddy R/o.H.No.3/65, Kandukur Village & Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Principal Secretary for Home, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District. 3 The Station House Officer, Kandukur Police Station, Kandukur, R.R. District. (impleaded as per Court order dated 27.04.2009 in W.P.M.P.No.5879 of 2009) .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue any writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to take action against the anti-social, unlawful and rowdy elements who are threatening the writ petitioner and his family members them to go for registration of their immovable property situated at Sy.No.8 admeasuring Ac.0-08 guntas in Mohammad Nagar, Revenue Village, Kandukur Mandal, Ranga Reddy District supported by the present Kandukur Circle Inspector and Sub-Inspector and to protect the property and lives of the writ petitioner and his family members from them. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.S.GOPALA KRISHNAN Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.3154 of 2009 ORDER: The main grievance of the petitioner is that he made several complaints to respondents 2 and 3- Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, and Station House Officer, Kandukur Police Station, respectively, alleging interference by some antisocial elements with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the immovable property bearing Sy.No.8, admeasuring Ac.0.08 guntas, situated at Mohammad Nagar Revenue Village, Kandukur Mandal of Ranga Reddy District, and seeking to provide protection from those antisocial elements, but the respondents 2 and 3 have not taken any action so far and, on the other hand, they have been supporting those antisocial elements. Respondents 2 and 3 have filed counter-affidavits denying the allegations made by the petitioner. In the counter-affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent- Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, while denying the allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated that upon receipt of the representation dated 09.02.2009 of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent has forwarded the same to the 3rd respondent on 11.02.2009 for necessary action, and, thereupon, the 3rd respondent has conducted a detailed enquiry and submitted a report on 23.02.2009 stating that the petitioner filed a false petition due to business rivalry with the persons against whom he made allegations in the said petition, and the D.C.P. (Crimes), after going through the said report, endorsed that no further action is necessary. It is further stated that the petitioner also submitted another petition to the 2nd respondent on 14.02.2009 stating that the S.I. and C.I. of Kandukur Police Station are not taking any action in the matter, and the same was forwarded to A.C.P., Ibrahimpatnam, for taking necessary action, who acted upon that petition and warned the counter-petitioners not to harass the petitioner. It is also further stated that on the persistence of the problem, the 2nd respondent has instructed the A.C.P., Saroornagar, to get a case registered as per the contents of the above petition and investigate the matter, and, accordingly, the A.C.P., Saroornagar, has got registered a case in Crime No.54 of 2009 for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and has taken up investigation. It is also stated that the A.C.P., Saroornagar, is nominated to conduct free, fair and impartial investigation in the matter as an officer outside the concerned Division and that the S.I. was removed from the Kandukur police station on 19.03.2009 and the C.I. was also moved out of the said police station on 22.04.2009, in order to facilitate a fair investigation. It is further assured by the 2nd respondent that proper protection would be provided to the petitioner, as per his request. In view of the aforesaid counter-averments, no further orders are required to be passed in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed, recording the averments made in the counter-affidavit of the 2nd respondent. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 27th April, 2009 IBL