IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 12853 of 2005 BETWEEN: Korthapalli Nageswar Rao S/o Late K. Satyanarayana R/o Plot No. 141, RTC colony, 4th Lane, Patamata, Vijayawada-8, Krishna District ... PETITIONER AND The State House Officer CI, Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ...RESPONDENT Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction declaring the inaction of the respondent in not completing the investigation and not submitting the report in Cr. No. 19/2000 to III Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India, as well as the mandatory provisions of the Cr.P.C and consequently direct the respondent to immediately complete the investigation and submit the report in Cr. No. 10/2000 to the Hon'ble III Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VIJAYA BHASKAR MOOLA Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in not completing the investigation and not submitting the report in Cr. No. 19/2000 to III Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art. 14 of the Constitution of India, as well as the mandatory provisions of the Cr.P.C and consequently direct the respondent to immediately complete the investigation and submit the report in Cr. No. 10/2000 to the Hon'ble III Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. 2. Counter has been filed stating that a private complaint was filed by the petitioner before the III Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada and on receipt of the same a case, the respondent came to the conclusion that the matter is civil in nature and not cognizable offence. Thereafter, the Assistant Commissioner of Police, also accorded permission to the respondent to refer the complaint of the petitioner as non-cognizable vide his order in C.No.5- 37/1/ACP.II/2000 date 11.12.2000. It is further stated that a notice has been served on the petitioner informing the result of the final report on 15.10.2005 and thereafter, the final report was filed before the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada on 18.10.2005. 3. In view of the fact that a final report has been filed before the concerned Magistrate, I am of the opinion that nothing survives in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with a liberty to the petitioner to question the said final report. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J May 1, 2008 DSK