IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 9488 of 2004 Between : 1 Smt. P.Sujatha W/o Gangadhar, M/s Jayasuja Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd Nizamabad, R/o Shakkar Nagar, Bodhan 2 P.Gangadhar S/o Laxman, M/s Jayauaja Chit Funds Pvt. Ltd. NIzamabad R/o Shakkar Nagar, Bodhan ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Superintendent of Police Nizamabad 2 The Deputy Superintendent of Police Bodhan, Nizamabad Dist 3 The Circle Inspector of Police Bodhan, Nizamabad dist 4 The Station House Officer Bodhan, Nizamabad dist 5 A.Jaya Prakash S/o Kishan Raj New India Assurance Co.Ltd. Nizamabad .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an order or direction or writ specially Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent authorities in calling the petitioners to Police station every day and subjecting them for false imprisonment is violative of Art. 14 , 19(1)(g) and 21 of constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to violate the fundamental rights of the petitioners guaranteed under constitution of India by calling the petitioner daily to police station. Counsel for the Petitioners : MR.RAJ KUMAR RUDRA Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioners, who are wife and husband, seek directions against the Police not to call them to the Police Station daily and not to harass them. 2. 1st petitioner is the Director and the 2nd petitioner is the Foreman of a Chit fund Company, being run by them in the name of ‘M/s.Jayasuja Chit Funds Private Limited’. In this writ petition, it is the case of the petitioners that there was a mis-management in the affairs of the Company, and at the instance of respondent No.5, who is the husband of one of the Directors of the Company, respondent/Police are harassing them. It is their grievance that though the matter is of civil nature, the respondent/Police are harassing them by calling them to the Police Station every day. 3. At the stage of admission, this Court granted directions against the respondent/Police not to harass the petitioners by calling them to the Police Station daily, unless there is any criminal case booked against them. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 4, it is stated that on 18.04.2004, one Sri Guggila Ramagoud has filed a written complaint before the 3rd respondent/Circle Inspector of Police, stating that the petitioners have established a Chit fund Company in the name of ‘M/s.Jayasuja Chit Funds Private Limited’, and enrolled him in Chit No.JSL/2/22. They collected chit amount from him regularly for a period of 40 months, but instead of paying back the chit amount on its realization, they were evading the repayment. On the basis of said complaint, which was filed before the 3rd respondent and was transmitted to the 4th respondent, a case was registered against the petitioners in Crime No.155 of 2004 for the alleged offence under Section 420 of I.P.C. In the counter affidavit, it is stated by the respondents that from the date of registration of crime, the petitioners are absconding, and hence, the question of harassing them does not arise, and therefore, they prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. In view of registration of a case in Crime No.155 of 2004 against the petitioners, it is always open for the respondents to investigate into the same. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that there is any harassment by the respondents. While it is open for the respondents to investigate into the crime registered against the petitioners, but at the same time, they cannot be called to the Police Station every day. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, I dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents to make investigation with reference to the case registered against the petitioners in Crime No.155 of 2004 for the offence under Section 420 of I.P.C., but at the same time, they should not be detained in the Police Station for the purpose of investigation. 7. Subject to above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 4th June 2009 ajr