IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26361 of 2006 Between: Mohd. Ali Qaiser … Petitioner And The Commissioner of Police, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad & others. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: None Counsel for respondents 1-3: AGP for Home Counsel for respondents 4&5: Sri K. Jamali The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.26361 of 2007 ORDER: As the nature of the writ petition is such that the same can be disposed of with appropriate directions, the writ petition, which is of the year 2006, is taken up for hearing and disposal. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.3 has been interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the property comprising a house plot with one room bearing H.No.19-4-387/7/A/1 admeasuring 200 square yards situated at the backside of Ali Siddique School, Bhadurpura, at the instance of third parties. One Kareemunnisa Begum wife of late Mohd. Kazim and another person by name Mohd. Tehwar Ali son of late Mohd. Osman Ali filed WPMP.No.4957 of 2007 seeking their impleadment. According to them, they are the owners of the property in question. They stated that on their lodging reports, two criminal cases, namely, FIR Nos.243 and 244 of 2006 were registered by respondent No.3, that the writ petitioner filed O.S.No.646 of 2007 for permanent injunction against them and that IA filed for temporary injunction was dismissed. At the hearing, Sri K. Jamali, learned counsel for the proposed respondents, submitted that the writ petitioner suppressed the material facts and filed the present writ petition. The respondents have not filed any counter affidavit. The petitioner also has not filed any counter affidavit opposing the implead application filed by the proposed respondents. Therefore, by a separate order, I have ordered the implead petition. From the uncontroverted facts brought to the notice of this Court by the impleaded respondents, it is quite evident that the dispute pertaining to the abovementioned property is the subject matter of O.S.No.646 of 2007 and the petitioner is an accused in the abovementioned two crimes. While the police are free to investigate the criminal cases, if the investigation into them is still pending, in the guise of such investigation, they cannot interfere in the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos.4 and 5. The parties are free to settle their civil rights in the pending suit or in any other proceedings, which they may initiate or may have already initiated before the competent Courts of law. Subject to the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.33872 of 2006 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. __________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 14.06.2010. ES