IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WEDNESDAY, THE 23rd DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION No.27639 of 2007 Between: New Navjeevan Colony Welfare Association (Regd.1668/07), reptd., by its President Ch.Kishore, S/o.Krishna Rao, 40 yrs, Business, 7-4-400/1/E, Ferozguda, Navajeevan Nagar, Secunderabad. … Petitioner And The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Gachi Bowli, Rangareddy District and three others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri M.S.N.Prasad Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home for R.1 to R.3 Sri D.Kodandarami Reddy for R.4. This Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.3 in interfering with the personal liberty of the members of the petitioner- Association by calling them to Police Station and threatening them to vacate the houses in their respective occupation in Survey No.72 of Ferozeguda, New Navajeevan colony, Balanagar, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal and arbitrary. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner- association, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for R.1 to R.3 and Sri D.Kodanda Rami Reddy, for R.4. The petitioner-association claims that it consists of 16 members, who have purchased small plots during 1986-2005 in Survey No.65 of Ferozeguda village, Balanagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. It also claimed that most of its members constructed houses, but respondent No.4, claiming to be the owner of the land admeasuring Ac.0.19 guntas in Survey No.72 of Ferozeguda village, filed O.S.No.2285 of 2007 on the file of I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, for perpetual injunction against some of the petitioners and that the said suit is being contested. The petitioner-association alleged that when the henchmen of respondent No.4 threatened the members of it, a couple of complaints and representations were given to respondent No.3 on 5-11-2007 and 1-12-2007, but no action has been taken against respondent No.4. The petitioner-association alleged that instead of taking action against respondent No.4, respondent No.3 has been summoning its members, at the instance of respondent No.4, and threatening them to vacate their houses. It is also alleged that respondent No.3 is insisting on the members of the petitioner-association to come to Police Station at odd hours. A counter-affidavit is filed by respondent No.3, in which it is, inter alia, stated that respondent No.4 filed a private complaint under Section 200 Cr.P.C., in the Court of IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, against one N.Nageswara Rao and five others, who are members of the petitioner-association, on the allegation that they are trying to encroach upon the land in Survey No.72 in the guise of claiming their rights over the lands in Survey Nos.64 to 67, which were already acquired by the Government; that the said persons forcibly trespassed into the said land on 24-9-2007 with iron rods and sticks and damaged the watchman room causing loss of Rs.10,000/- and assaulted him; and that on receipt of the said complaint, the jurisdictional Magistrate referred the same to respondent No.3 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. It is further averred that after receipt of the said complaint, Crime No.300 of 2007 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 447, 427, 323, 506 and 148 IPC against the said persons on 3-12-2007 and investigation is taken up in the said Crime, which is pending. It is further stated that no arrests have so far been made. Respondent No.3 denied the allegation that he is summoning the members of the petitioner-association to the Police Station, and alleged that to divert the attention of the investigation officer the present Writ Petition is filed. In the reply-affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner-association, they have stated that none of the members of the petitioner-association is concerned with land in Survey No.72 and that respondent No.4, who failed to get an order of injunction from the Civil Court, is trying to forcibly evict the members of the petitioner- association. In view of the fact that on the private complaint filed by respondent No.3 a criminal case has already been registered against six of the members of the petitioner-association, it is not possible for this Court to interdict respondent No.3 from investigating into the said crime. However, respondent No.3 would do well not to meddle in the civil dispute between the petitioner- association and respondent No.4 in the guise of investigation into the pending criminal case. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J 23-4-2008 MNR