HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 17315 OF 2011 . DATED 20th July, 2011 BETWEEN A. Anthony …Petitioner And The Station House Officer, Chandrayanagutta Police Station, Hyderabad and ors ….Respondents. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No. 17315 of 2011. ORDER: The petitioner is an ex-serviceman, having served 32 years in the para military in Central Reserve Police Force. It is averred that earlier the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 16137 of 2009 challenging the show cause notice dated 12.06.2009 issued by the CRPF officials directing him to vacate the government quarter and the said Writ Petition is said to be pending adjudication. It is averred that the CRPF officials without issuing prior notice, without following due procedure, and without any order from Court of law, unlawfully and illegally broken the lock of his government quarter bearing No. B.85, Type II Special at CRPF campus, Chandrayanagutta, Hyderabad, and took away all valuables including gol ornaments, cash, household articles etc., and thereby committed officences punishable under Sections 390, 378, 405, 410, 425, 441, 442, 445 and 464 IPC. It is further averred that though he approached the police officials on 20.1.2010 to lodge a complaint against the erring officials of CRPFs, the respondent authorities refused to receive the same. He also sent a complaint on 6.2.2010 through Registered Post Acknowledgment Due, which was received by them on 9.2.2010, but, the respondent authorities did not register any crime against the CRPF officials mentioned therein. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a private complaint before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and the same was referred to the respondents-Police, who registered the same as Crime No. 67 of 2011. It is the main focal grievance of the petitioner that despite registration of the aforesaid crime, the respondent-police have not taken any further action against the CRPF officials, conducted proper investigation and filed final report before the criminal Court. In these circumstances, the petitioner prayed that appropriate action be initiated against the respondent-Police and punish them as per law The learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the State submitted that subsequent to the registration of the crime referred by the Court of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrte, Hyderabad, the respondent-police have completed the investigation and final report would be filed as soon as possible. From the standpoint of the respondents, it is axiomatic that soon after the receipt of the complaint of the petitioner referred to by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, a case in Crime No. 67 of 2011 was registered and they have also completed the investigation in the said crime. It is also palpable from the contentions of the respondents that final report as required under the Criminal Procedure Code would be filed within short time. In that view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the Writ Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. However, it is needless to observe that if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the so called action on the part of the respondent-police, he can make a further written complaint either under Section 154 (3) Cr.P.C. before the concerned Superintendent of police or under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C before a competent criminal Court, if he is so advised. The Writ Petition is accordingly sands dismissed. There shall be order as to costs. ------------------------------------ -- JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA Dated 20th July, 2011. Msnro