IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22589 of 2007 Between: Pyata Mallesh … Petitioner AND The Superintendent of Police, Medak District, Sangareddy & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner : Sri Y.V. Srinivasan Counsel for respondents 1to3: AGP for Home Counsel for respondent No.4: Sri K. Sairam Murthy This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22589 of 2007 ORDER:- 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 life and liberty and also insisting the petitioner and his family members to withdraw the civil suit filed against respondent No.4, as illegal, arbitrary and without authority of law. Heard Sri Y.V. Srinivasan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri K. Sairam Murthy for respondent No.4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there are disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.4 and suits and counter suits filed by and against them are pending. He submitted that respondent Nos.2 and 3, at the instance of respondent No.4, have been bringing pressure on the petitioner to withdraw the suit, namely, O.S.No.292 of 2007 filed by him against respondent No.4 and his brother and interfering with the civil disputes. In the counter-affidavit filed by respondent No.3 it is stated that on the complaint given by one Sri K.V.Krishna Chary son of late Chendraiah, Supervisor of respondent No.4 on 07.10.2007, Crime No.399 of 2007 was registered against the petitioner under Sections 379 and 506 (ii) IPC and investigation was taken up into the same. He further stated that except filing of the said criminal case, the police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.4. No reply affidavit has been filed controverting the allegations contained in the said counter-affidavit. Inasmuch as respondent No.3 made a categorical assertion that he is not interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.4, the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition as infructuous, WPMP.No.29351 of 2007 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ____________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 21.04.2008 ES