IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No. 6265 of 2009 Between: 1 Amulozu Krishna Chaithanya, S/o Satyanarayana, R/o. Dr.No.40-1-21, Mohana Brudavanam Apartments, Mangalavarapupeta, Rajahmundry, E.G.District. 2 Amulozu Venkata Raju, S/o Satyanarayana, R/o. Dr.No.40-1-21, Mohana Brudavanam Apartments, Mangalavarapupeta, Rajahmundry, E.G.District. 3 Amulozu Satyanarayana, S/o. Late Venkata Raju, R/o. Dr.No.40-1-21, Mohana Brudavanam Apartments, Mangalavarapupeta, Rajahmundry, E.G.District. 4 Amulozu Ramalakshmi, W/o Satyanarayana, R/o. Dr.No.40-1-21, Mohana Brudavanam Apartments, Mangalavarapupeta, Rajahmundry, E.G.District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, East Godavari District at Kakinada. 2 The Station House Officer, Samarlakota P.S, East Godavari District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in harassing and interfering with the petitioners day to day affairs without any complaint against the petitioners as illegal, arbitrary and unjust in violation of Art.14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently direct the 2nd respondent Police not to interfere with the life and personal liberty of the petitioners in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI K.VENKATESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.6265 of 2009 ORDER: The grievance of the petitioners is that the 2nd respondent-Station House Officer, Samarlakota Police Station, East Godavari District, is harassing by calling them to the police station, on the pretext of investigation in Crime No.81 of 2008 on the file of the 2nd respondent’s police Station, with which they are no way concerned, and also interfering with their day-to-day affairs, even though no complaint is registered against them. The 2nd respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit, wherein, while denying the allegations made against them that they are harassing and threatening the petitioners, it is specifically stated that except the 1st petitioner, who was figured as Accused No.2 in Crime No.81 of 2008, on the file of Samarlakota Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498 (A), 406, 420 IPC, no case is registered against petitioners 2 to 4 and they are not at all required in the said crime. In view of the aforesaid counter averments of the 2nd respondent, no further orders are required to be passed in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed recording the aforesaid counter averments. _____________ N.V.RAMANA,J 22.04.2009 v v