IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 26392 of 2008 Between: Chekuri Srinivasa Murthy S/o. Prakasa Rao R/o. D.No. 3-17-47/20 Lakshmi Nagar, Gadarigunta, Kakinada, E.G. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Sub Divisional Magistrate Cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Kakinada, East Godavari District. 3 The Sub Inspector of Police, II Town Police Station Kakinada. 4 The Circle Inspector of Police, Kakinada Town Circle Kakinada, E.G. District. 5 Indirani Nanda Kumar W/o. R. Nanda Kumar Tamilnadu. 6 R. Nanda Kumar S/o. P.V. Ramanujalu Naidu Tamilnadu. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.N.V.ANANTHA KRISHNA Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR HOME Counsel for Respondent Nos.5 and 6: --- The Court made the following: ORDER: At the interlocutory stage, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in not disposing M.C.No.27 of 2008, as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6 are at loggerheads over 1077 square yards of land in Survey No.301 (old) / 45/4C (New) situated at Suryaraopeta, Godarigunta, Kakinada. While respondent Nos.5 and 6 filed O.S.No.928 of 2007 on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kakinada, the petitioner filed O.S.No.112 of 2008 in the Court of the learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada. Evidently, both the parties obtained orders of injunction in their favour. Apprehending breach of peace and Law and Order problem, respondent No.2 initiated proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’) vide M.C.No.27 of 2008 and issued notice dated 11-11-2008. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner averred that in response to the said notice, he filed objections before respondent No.2 stating that when a civil suit is pending, the latter had no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C. His grievance is that no order has been passed therein and the proceedings are kept pending. At the hearing, Sri M.P.Chandramouli, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6, submitted that as there were conflicting injunction orders granted in favour of the petitioner on one side and respondent Nos.5 and 6 on the other, respondent No.2 had to initiate proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C., ancicipating breach of peace and that later, the injunction order granted in I.A.No.2479 of 2008 in O.S.No.112 of 2008 in favour of the petitioner was vacated by the Civil Court on 02-12-2008 and that in view of the same, there is no reason for apprehending breach of peace. Having regard to the facts noted above, I am of the view that no purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings initiated by respondent No.2 under Section 145 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, respondent No.2 is directed to close the said proceedings as parties have already approached the civil Court, which passed appropriate orders. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, interim order dated 03-12-2008 is vacated and W.P.M.P.No.34555 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed. ______________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) 26th June, 2009 lur