IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION No.17730 of 2008 Between: E. Ravinder Goud, S/o. E. Ranganna Goud, R/o. H.No. 14-103, Netaji Nagar, Atmakur (V&M), Mahabubnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House Officer, Atmakur Police Station, Mahabubnagar District. 2 The Toddy Tapers Co-operative Society, Atmakur Village and Mandal, Mahabubnagar District, Rep. by its President, Manohar Goud. 3 Smt. Makam Sharada, W/o. Srihari, R/o. BC Colony, Atmakur, Mahabubnagar District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in harassing the petitioner for the purpose of his arrest in connection with C.C.No. 13/2008 on the ﬁle of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Atmakur, Mahabubnagar District as ﬁled by the 1st respondent, though the petitioner is no way connected to the above Criminal Case nor he is an accused therein, as illegal, arbitrary and against Article 21 of Indian Constitution and Consequently declare that the Petitioner and A-1 in the above Criminal Case is not one and the same. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.M.DAMODAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM Writ Petition No.17730 of 2008 Oral Order: On the complaint of the 3rd respondent, Crime No.21 of 2007 was registered on 21.01.2008 on the ﬁle of P.S.Atmakur, Mahabubnagar District, against two accused, namely, Bathula Ravi S/o Balaiah, and Manohar Goud S/o Narayana Goud. Both of them belong to Atmakur, of whom, the 2nd accused is recorded as absconding. The accused are alleged to have committed an offence under the A.P. Excise Act, 1968. Petitioner pleads and states that he is E.Ravinder Goud, but not Bathula Ravi, 1st accused in Crime No.21 of 2007, but nevertheless respondent No.1 is visiting his house frequently and attempting to arrest him, even though he is not the accused and in no way concerned with Crime No.21 of 2007 on the ﬁle of P.S.Atmakur. The learned Government Pleader for Home, on instructions from the 1st respondent, states that during the course of investigation into Crime No.21 of 2007, it is revealed that it is the petitioner who also moves under an alias Bathula Ravi, is the 1st accused, and that appropriate steps would be taken to incorporate the name of the petitioner as the 1st accused in crime No.21 of 2007 and till then the 1st respondent would not take steps to arrest the petitioner. In view of the submission made by the learned Government Pleader for Home on behalf of the 1st respondent, the grievance of the petitioner does not subsist. The writ petition is dismissed, recording the statement of the learned Government Pleader for Home. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ (Justice Goda Raghuram) 27th August 2008 sh