IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 21202 of 2008 Between: M.Bhargavi W/o.M.T.Srinivasa RAo R/o.H.No.16-11-1/5/2,&3 Plot No.502, Suharthinest , Saleemnagar colony, Malakpet Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad 2 The Station House officer,P.S.Malakpet At Malakpet,Hyderabad 3 M.T.Srinivasa Rao S/o.M. Sri Ramalingeswara Rao R/o.1-9-312/E/3,Achutareddy Vidyanagar,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 to issue writ or direction preferably writ ofmandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 in exectuing NBWs against respondent No.3 as illegal, arbitrary,and violative of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to execute NBWs against the Accused 2 and 3 in CC.No.56/02 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.KOWTURU VINAYA KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI W. P. No.21202 of 2008 ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. The writ petitioner is the wife of the 3rd respondent herein. On a complaint made by the petitioner, a crime was registered against the 3rd respondent and his mother and father for oﬀences punishable under Section.498-A of IPC read with Sec.3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act,1961. On the basis of the charge sheet ﬁled by the Investigation Oﬃcer, CC.No.56 of 2002 has been taken on file and the same is pending. The present writ petition is filed alleging that though the matter is pending for the past seven years, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are not showing any interest to execute the Non- bailable warrants issued against the accused. It is contended that unless and until the accused 2 and 3 are brought before the Court the very purpose of ﬁling the complaint would be defeated. Hence the petitioner seeks a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to execute the Non-bailable Warrants against the accused in C.C.No.56 of 2002. At the outset, it is to be noted that Sec.82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 provides for proclamation and attachment of the property of the person absconding where the Court has reason to believe that any person against whom a warrant has been issued has absconded or is concealing himself leading to non-execution of the warrants. Hence, even assuming that the Non-bailable Warrants issued against the accused in C.C.No.56 of 2002 have not yet been executed for any reason, the learned Magistrate will take the appropriate steps in accordance with law for ensuring the appearance of the accused. Hence the interference by this Court is unwarranted. Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 29.09.2008 *TSNR