IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.1261 of 2007 Between: T.Sudhas Chander Reddy S/o.Sri T.Ram Reddy Plot No.46, Manneguda X Roads, Turkemjala R.R.District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Station House Officer, Vanasthalipuram Police Station Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad 2 Vigilance Cell, CS Department, V.C.C.S.D.Circle Ranga Reddy District 3 Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.C.RAGHU Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner assailed the action of the respondents in registering Crime No.702 of 2006 against him on 14-10-2006. The petitioner is a dealer in petroleum products pertaining to Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited. Consequent on the check conducted on his premises, Crime No.52/VC-RR/2000 was registered on 21-08- 2000 by the Vigilance Cell, Civil Supplies Department, Hyderabad Range. The said Vigilance Cell was disbanded and all the Criminal cases were transferred to the Police Stations concerned. Accordingly, the petitioner’s case was transferred to respondent No.1- Police Station for further investigation and in pursuance of the same, the said Crime was re-registered as Crime No.702 of 2006. It is stated in the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.1-Inspector of Police, Vanasthalipuram Police Station, that the petitioner, who is Accused No.1 (for short ‘A.1’) in the above-said Crime is absconding and avoiding arrest; that after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in the Court of VII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar, with a request to issue Non-bailable warrants against the petitioner/A.1; that the said Court issued Non-bailable warrant against the petitioner on 02-08- 2007 and; that since then, continuous efforts are being made to trace out the petitioner for execution of Non- bailable Warrant. At the hearing, Sri C.Raghu, learned Counsel for the petitioner, invited my attention to the petitioner’s pleadings in paragraph 5 of the affidavit, filed in support of the Writ Petition, wherein the petitioner categorically averred that he applied for regular bail under Section 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and obtained the same. The learned Counsel, therefore, stated that the question of the petitioner absconding does not arise and the issuance of Non-bailable Warrants against him is illegal. He also filed material in support of his contention that both the accused in Crime No.52/VC- RR/2000 were present before the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District, on 26-09-2002. The above-averments have not been denied by respondent No.1 in his counter-affidavit. Therefore, the Non-bailable Warrants issued against the petitioner cannot be sustained. The Writ Petition is allowed to the above limited extent only. It is made clear that this Court has not interfered with the Criminal case pending against the petitioner. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 17th July, 2009 lur