IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.3912 of 2009 DATE:13.08.2010 Between: A.Prabhakar Naidu and others …… Petitioners And: State By Station House Officer, Mudigubba Police Station and another …..Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.3912 of 2009 ORDER : The petitioners 1 to 5/A-1 to A-5 are accused of offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 452, 506 I.P.C and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act in Crime No.81/2008 of Mudigubba Police Station of Anantapur District. Dispute between the defacto-complainant/2nd respondent and A-1 is with regard to the shop room in which A-1 ran a wine shop. Previously there was civil suit between the parties in O.S. No.531 of 2006 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kadiri for declaration that permission granted by the Excise Department in favour of A-1 for running the shop as illegal. It is alleged that A- 1 forged a lease agreement said to have been executed by the 2nd respondent in his favour in respect of that shop room, and filed the said forged rent agreement in that civil suit. Ultimately the 2nd respondent withdrew that suit. It is alleged that when the 2nd respondent was pressing the police for taking action against A-1 for forging lease deed and using the same as genuine one in Court, on 22.05.2008 at about 11.00 P.M, A-1 to A-5 trespassed into his house with deadly weapons like sickles, axes and iron pipes and that A-1 was armed with a revolver and that A-1 questioned him about his intention to file case on the rent agreement and that A-1 threatened them to kill in case any case is filed against him. Allegations in the report given by the 2nd respondent to the police disclose the offences for which the crime was registered by the police. Truth or falsity of the said allegations cannot be gone into and decided in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is for the police to investigate into the allegations and to come to some conclusion on the basis of evidence collected by them and file final report before the Magistrate. I do not find any reasons to intercept the investigation in this matter. 2) Hence, the petition is dismissed. _______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J August 13, 2010 KSH