IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No : 2426 of 2008 Between: Gara Vijaya Raju, Jaggayya, Hindu Nathavaram(M) Vizag ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Sub Inspector of Police, Nathavaram Police Station Nathavaram,Vizag Dist 2 Circle Inspector of Police Narsipatnam,Visakhapatnam Dist 3 Gogada Asirvadam, W/o.Sudarsana Rao, Band Colony Prasanth Nagar Narsipatnam,Visakhapatnam Dist .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner : None Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP for Home The Court made the following O R D E R : This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the action of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in interfering with the petitioner’s civil rights as illegal and in violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner also sought for a consequential direction to the said respondents not to interfere with his civil rights and personal liberty. At the hearing, no one appeared for the petitioner. The writ petition is, therefore, liable to be dismissed in default. However, since a counter-affidavit has been filed, I am inclined to dispose it of on merits. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner made serious allegations against respondent Nos. 1 and 2 which include their interference with the property disputes between him and respondent No.3, forcing him to receive Rs.1,65,000/- from respondent No.3 and give up his rights over the land and their taking signatures on blank papers in the police station on 15.07.2007. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, all these allegations were denied. It is averred therein that respondent No.3 lodged a complaint on 07.02.2008 against the petitioner stating that while he was cultivating the lands comprised in Survey Nos.58/3B, 59/1A, 62/2, 52/1, he trespassed into the said lands and beat him with sticks causing injuries apart from abusing him in filthy language, that based on the complaint, Crime No. 5 of 2008 under Sections 447, 323 read with 34 IPC was registered on 07.02.2008 and that investigation was taken up by respondent No.1 and the same is pending. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 stated that they have not been interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.3. In the reply affidavit filed by him, the petitioner has reiterated the allegations and termed registration of crime as fabrication. The question whether respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have been interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.3 falls in the realm of disputed facts which cannot be gone into and adjudicated by this Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If registration of crime is frivolous, in the opinion of the petitioner, he has his remedies available under the Code of Criminal Procedure. If respondent Nos. 1 and 2 unlawfully interfere with the civil disputes between him and respondent No.3, the petitioner shall be free to file a private complaint against them before the jurisdictional Magistrate, apart from approaching the superiors of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to take action against them for their alleged unlawful acts. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No. 3127 of 2008 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. (C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 24th March, 2008 ksld ksld