IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 18961 of 2009 Between: Thammisetty Rajani W/o.Thammisetti Sreenu R/o.Paluguntipalli village, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Prakasam District. 2 The S.H.O. Racherla P.S. Prakasam District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the in action of the 2nd respondent in not filing the investigating report in Crime No.19/2008 dt. 07.08.08 which was booked pursuant to the private complaint forwarded by the Hon'ble Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Giddalur filed by the petitioner even after lapse of one year, as illegal, arbitrary violative of articles 14, 19 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to file investigating report in the aforesaid crime by duly investigating into the matter. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.VENKATA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 18961 of 2009 ORDER: 1 The grievance of the petitioner is that on the basis of the report given by him, though a case in Cr.No.19 of 2008 was registered on 07.08.2008, as the police have not investigated into the matter so far, he approached this court and filed the present Writ Petition. 2 On instructions, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that the police after completion of the investigation have filed a charge sheet on 07.09.2009 against the accused therein for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and as the accused did not appear before the court, N.B.Ws are pending against them. 3 In the light of the subsequent development, this court is of the view that no orders need be passed in this Writ Petition. 4 Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. No costs. ------------------------------ 13.10.2009 kvsn