IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND TEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3884 of 2010 Between: Madugula Venkatnarsu … Petitioner And The Director General of Police, Hyderabad & others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Kasi Nageswara Rao Counsel for respondents 1-4: AGP for Home This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3884 of 2010 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent Nos.1 to 4 in taking action on the petitioner’s complaint dated 08.02.2010 as illegal and arbitrary. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. The petitioner gave a report on 28.01.2010 on the basis of which Crime No.15 of 2010 was registered against one person by name, Smt. Madugula Susheela for the offence under Section 306 IPC. While the investigation into the said case was pending, the petitioner filed representation dated 08.02.2010 stating that his further information revealed that respondent Nos.5 and 6 herein are also involved in the commission of offence and accordingly he requested respondent No.4 to include the said two persons also as accused. As no action has been taken thereon, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submitted that the enquiries conducted on the abovementioned representation of the petitioner revealed that respondent Nos.5 and 6 were not involved in the offence and therefore they were not shown as accused. While exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it is not possible for this Court to decide on the issue raised by the petitioner as to whether respondent Nos.5 and 6 have been involved in the offence in question or not. The petitioner is entitled to file a private complaint under Section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the jurisdictional Magistrate. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the above stated remedy. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.5055 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. _____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 06.04.2010 ES