IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND SIX PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 5223 of 2006 Between: Chinta Padma w/o Sivaramakoteswararao, Lalkbazar, Narasaraopet, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. Station House Officer, Narasaraopet Town police station, Narasaraopet, Guntur & another .....RESPONDENTS ORDER: (Per the Honourable Smt.Justice T.Meenakumari) This is a taken up case on the Telegram issued by the petitioner seeking a direction in the nature of writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce her husband viz., Chintha Sivaramakoteswararao, s/o Punnaiah, Iiabazar, Narasaraopet, Guntur District, who is illegally detained since 7.3.2006 by Narasaraopet police, before this Court and set him at liberty. The respondents have filed the counter denying the allegations in the Telegram. It is contended in the counter that on the complaint given by the father of the alleged detenue alleging that the alleged detenue and his sister are harassing him for his properties and also threatening him, his wife and the tenants, the alleged detenue was called to the police station and at that time, the alleged detenue gave an undertaking that he will not interfere with the affairs of his parents or their tenants and therefore, the alleged detenue and his father left the police station. Subsequently, after the due investigation, since the dispute pertains to the civil in nature, both the alleged detenue and his father were advised to approach the Civil Court. It is submitted across the Bar by the learned Advocate General that there are civil disputes between the alleged detenue and his father and on the complaint given by his father, the alleged detenue was called to the police and then both of them were advised to approach the Civil Court for their reddressel and therefore, the question of alleged detention does not arise. In view of the submission made by the learned Additional Advocate General and in view of the averments made in the counter, We are of the view that no further orders are necessary in this writ petition. In the result, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. (T.MEENAKUMARI, J) 22nd March, 2006 (K.C.BHANU, J) GURC THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION NO :5223 of 2006 (Order delivered by the Honourable Smt.Justice T.Meena Kumari) 22nd March, 2006.