HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.30449 of 2010 Date: 13.12.2010 Between : Chilakalapudi Sambasiva Rao … Petitioner and Manam Subhashchandra Bose and others. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.30449 of 2010 ORAL ORDER : In this writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that the Station House Officer, Pedavegi Police Station, and the Superintendent of Police, West Godavari District, who are respondent Nos.7 and 8, respectively, are not taking any action against the respondent Nos.1 to 6 on the complaint of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner claims that he is the absolute owner and possessor of the land admeasuring Acs.17-26 cents situated in Jagannadhapuram village and Pedavegi Mandal, West Godavari District, and another extent of Acs.25-85 cents in R.S.Nos.69/2 and 70 situated in Muttannavedi village, Pedavegi Mandal, West Godavari District. Alleging that there was interference by respondents 1 to 3 herein, he approached the civil Court and obtained injunction orders. Now, the petitioner filed a complaint before the police stating that inspite of the injunction orders obtained by him in suit O.S.No.1194 of 2002, dated 21.10.2008, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District, the respondents are trying to interfere with his possession over the said lands. 3. I have perused the copy of the complaints filed by the petitioner before the police and also the judgment, dated 21.10.2008, of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, passed in O.S.No.1194 of 2002. 4. Admittedly, the dispute is purely of civil nature. If there are any orders from the civil Court and if there is any violation of the said orders, the petitioner can complain to the civil Court by filing appropriate application under the provisions of Civil Procedure Code. In the absence of any specific instances attracting the offence punishable under the provisions of Indian Penal Code, basing on a vague complaint, which is of civil nature, respondent Nos.7 and 8 have rightly not taken any action against respondent Nos.1 to 6. 5. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________________ JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY 13.12.2010. Msr HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.30449 of 2010 13.12.2010 Msr