IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 3496 of 2008 Between: Ashok Kumar Agarwal S/o harikishan Agarwal r/o H. No. 1-5-6/33, Musheerabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 the Commissioner of Police, basheerbagh, Hyderabad 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Polcie, Central Zone, Hyderabad. 3 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Chikkadpally Division, Hyderabad. 4 the Station House Officer, P.S. Musheerbad Hyderabad. 5 Krishna Rao Keshav R/o Sri Narayana R/o 6-1-101/1, Padmaraonagar, Secunderabad. 6 K. Vijaya W/o Sri Krishna Rao Keshav R/o 6-1-101/1, padmaraonagar, Secunderabad. 7 M. Rmana S/o M.V. Challan R/o 6-1-101/1, padmaraonagar, Secunderabad. 8 K. Jhansi Rani D/o K.P. Ramanaiah R/o 3-5-171, Opp Water Tank, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad 9 B. balraj Goud S/o B. Lingamaiah Goud R/o 1-8-3/27, Chikkadpally, Hyderabad. 10 A.M. Raja S/o A. Muthamaih Goud, R/o Plot No. 42, P&T Colony, Gandhi nagar, Kavadiguda, Hyderabad. .....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 Writ, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaringthe inaction of Respondents NO. 1 to 4 in not executing the Non-Bailable Warrants issued by the Hon'ble IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad against respondents No.6 and 7 in CC. No. 1496/2005 dated 22-10-2007 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequentially directthe Respondents No. 1 to 4 to Excute the Non- bailable Warrants Pending against Respondents No.6 and 7 issued by the Hon'ble IX Additional Chief Metroplitan Magistrate, hyderabad in C.c. No. 1496/2005 dated 22-10-2007 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court maydeem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.PRIYADARSHAN REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following ORER: The learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the Writ Petition. Permission is accorded and the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, it is made clear that if the respondents 1 to 4 are not executing the Non Bailable Warrants issued against respondents 6 and 7, it is open for the petitioner to move the concerned Court by filing appropriate application under Section 80 Cr.P.C. No order as to costs. ---------------------------------- JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY DATE: 26-2-2008 Msnr.