IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.2946 of 2009 Between: 1 Kurva Bovaiah S/o. Late Mallaiah R/o. Patel Road, Shadnagar, Mahaboobnagar District. 2 Kurva Yadaiah S/o. Bovaiah R/o. Patel Road, Shadnagar, Mahaboobnagar District. ..... PETITIONERS AND The Inspector of Police, Shadnagar, Mahaboobnagar District. .....RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.RAVI KONDAVEETI Counsel for the Respondent: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: The alleged act of the respondent in interfering with the petitioners’ right of enjoying land admeasuring Ac.14.16 guntas in Survey No.404 (old) of Chatanpally Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District is assailed in this writ petition. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Sub Inspector of Police, Shadnagar Police Station, Mahaboobnagar District it is inter alia stated that on a complaint filed by one Nemarugomula Chalapathi Rao, Ex- Serviceman, resident of Vanasthalipuram, Hyderabad stating that the petitioners were interfering with his enjoyment of Ac.2.21 guntas of land comprised in Survey No.678 of Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District by seeking to plough the land and that he obtained an order of injunction from the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Shadnagar, Crime No.56 of 2009 was registered against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 447 and 504 read with Section 34 I.P.C on 09.02.2009. It is further stated that the petitioners filed proceedings in this Court to quash the said crime and obtained interim stay of all further proceedings therein for a period of four weeks by order dated 16.02.2009 and that in view of the stay order investigation was stopped. It is further stated that the respondent is not interfering with the civil disputes. A perusal of the proceeding sheet shows that on 16.02.2009 this Court granted the following order: “Pending further orders, there shall be a direction to the respondent not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners in respect of Ac.1-01 gunta of land situated in Sy.No.678 of Chatanpally Village, Farooqnagar Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District without following due process of law.” At the hearing, Sri Ravi Kondaveeti, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after granting of the above mentioned order by this Court, the respondent is not interfering with the petitioners’ possession of the land. While the police are entitled to investigate into a complaint disclosing commission of an offence, it is not part of their duty to interfere in civil disputes. Unless a Court of competent jurisdiction directs the police to protect the private property of a person, there can be no justification for the police to intervene in the civil disputes between the private parties. The respondent will do well to refrain from making such interference between the petitioners and the complainant in the criminal case except to the extent of investigating into the case in accordance with the provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition as indicated above, W.P.M.P.No.9313 of 2009 and W.V.M.P.No.1414 of 2009 are disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 11.06.2009 Note: Furnish CC by Monday (B/o.) va