IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 17890 of 2009 Between: N.Satyavathi . .Petitioner And The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad and others. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO.17890 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioner approached this Court and filed the present writ petition with the following prayer: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit it is prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to provide police protection to the petitioner and her possession and enjoyment over the property house bearing M.C.No.2-53, total admeasuring 3000 sq.yards under Sy.No.25, situated at Gachibowli, Serilingampally mandal, Rangareddy District, in accordance with law and consequently direct the respondents to consider the representation/complaint dated: 15.07.2009 and 22.08.2009 forthwith”. 2) On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that there is so much of litigation between the petitioner and Smt.R.Subhadra Reddy. On the basis of complaint lodged by said Subhadra Reddy, a case in Crime No.425 of 2003 was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 447 and 290 of IPC. Thereafter a charge sheet was also filed and the same was numbered as C.C. No.2952 of 2005 on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, West and South Court at L.B.Nagar. He has further stated that the said representations dated 15.07.2009 and 22.08.2009 were received by the police and after holding an enquiry, it came to the conclusion that the allegations made in the complaint are incorrect. 3) In the light of the above written instructions received by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, no orders need be passed in this writ petition. 4) Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) September 2, 2009 KSH