THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.9722 of 2010 Date : 30-8-2010 Between: K.L.Srinivas Rao s/o.late K.Laxmanji, Occ: Government servant, R/o.12-11-1127, Boudha Nagar, Warasiguda, Secunderabad. .. Petitioner And The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad Commissionerate, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad and others .. Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Sri Prem Raj Counsel for respondents 1 to 4 : A.G.P. for Home Counsel for respondents 5 and 6 : Sri Abhinand Kumar Shavili The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.9722 of 2010 ORDER: The grievance of the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that despite representation dated 27-5-2009 submitted by him to 1st respondent for taking appropriate criminal action against respondents 5 and 6, no action has been taken. According to the petitioner, respondents 5 and 6 are responsible for the death of his father and that no action has been taken against them in spite of the petitioner lodging a report to the Station House Officer and the above mentioned representation made to the 1st respondent. Sri Abhinand Kumar Shavili, the learned Counsel representing respondents 5 and 6 submitted that this is a vexatious petition by which the petitioner who is none other than the brother of the 6th respondent and brother-in-law of the 5th respondent, is seeking to settle scores with them in connection with civil disputes. From the representation made to the 1st respondent, I am unable to decipher the true purport of the same. If the petitioner intended to lodge a report for the alleged killing of his father by the 5th respondent or the 6th respondent, he is supposed to lodge a specific report in this regard before the Station House Officer concerned. In stead of doing that, the petitioner has gone on the spree of making representations to the higher functionaries such as the 1st respondent and the employer of the 5th respondent. This conduct raises reasonable suspicion in the mind of this Court that the petitioner is only seeking to harass the respondents 5 and 6 taking shelter under the death of his father. Therefore, I am not prepared to entertain this Writ Petition and give directions to the respondents 1 to 4. This order, however, does not prevent the petitioner from pursuing the report, if any, lodged on the alleged killing of his father in accordance with provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, W.P.M.P.No.12530/2010 is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Date : 30-8-2010 AM