IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 8527 of 2004 Between: Kasara Venkata Reddy, S/o Subba Reddy, Hindu, Sri Lakshmi Largesized Co-operative Credit Society, Lakkavaram, Jangareddigudem, W.G. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Director General of Police, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 2 Superintendent of Police, Eluru, W.G. District. 3 District Collector, Eluru, W.G. District. 4 M.A. Roshan, DSP, Jangareddygudem, W.G. District. 5 K. Appalaswamy, Sub Inspector of Attili, W.G. District. .....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 any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the in action of the respondents 1 to 3 herein in not taking any action on the complaints given by the petitioner on 1- 1-2004 , 17-2-2004 and 18-2-2004 as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and for a consequential direction to the respondents 1 to 3 herein to take appropriate action on the complaint submitted by the petitioner on 1-1-2004, 17-2-2004 and 18-2-2004 Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.M.V.SURESH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: The only grievance of the petitioner is that the official respondents 1 to 3 are not taking any action on the complaints given by him on 01.01.2004, 17.02.2004 and 18.02.2004. It is stated that the complaints dated 01.01.2004, 17.02.2004 and 18.02.2004 have not at all been received in the office of the official respondents except the petition dated 28.01.2004 addressed to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of this Court. It is further stated that as the said complaints have not at all been received by the official respondents, the question of taking any action on the said complaints does not arise. It is further stated that, in fact, one Boddapati Jaya Raju made a complaint against the petitioner before the 5th respondent and basing on the said complaint a case in Crime No.45 of 2003 for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has registered against the petitioner submitting copy of FIR to the Sub-Divisional Police Officer for investigation. The other allegation that the 4th respondent demanded Rs.10,000/- not to arrest the petitioner is denied. It is stated that on 06.05.2004 the petition dated 28.01.2004 addressed to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of this Court received in the office of District Police Office, West Godavari at Eluru through the Collector was enquired into by the Sub- Inspector of Polcie,Lakkavaram and he submitted a report to the higher authorities on 12.06.2004 stating that the allegations leveled against the police officers are false and baseless and the said report was also sent to the Collector, West Godavari at Eluru vide proceedings dated 12.07.2004. In the circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the said disputed questions of fact cannot be decided into in this writ petition. However, if the complaints are not received by the official respondents and no action has been taken, it is always open to the petitioner to file a private complaint before the Magistrate concerned under Section 200 Cr.P.C. Having regard to the facts of the case, I am of the opinion that no writ of mandamus can be issued and hence, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to file a private complaint before the Magistrate concerned for taking necessary action on the complaints said to have been made by the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:17.04.2008 Ccm To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{AVLR}