IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION No.4325 of 2008 Between: P.Sarojini. … Petitioner And The Superintendent of Police, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam district and Three others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri P.N.Murthy Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home for R.1 and R.2. This Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not taking action on complaint dated 5-12-2007 filed by the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioner. In her affidavit the petitioner stated that in the month of October, 2007 some local persons claiming to be CPM Activists tried to occupy the land belonging to the petitioner on the mistaken impression that the same is an assigned land. When they sought to forcibly enter into the same, the petitioner gave a complaint to the S.I. of Police, Golugonda Police Station, but so far no action has been taken. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Asst. Sub- Inspector of Police, Golugonda Police Station, Visakhapatnam District, it is stated that on receipt of complaint dated 5-10-2007 from the petitioner, the same was enquired into, which revealed that the petitioner already approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, Narsipatnam, by filing a petition before him making the same allegations; that the said RDO., took the same on file as MC No.67 of 2007 and forwarded the same to him for enquiry and report; that enquiry was conducted and a report was submitted to the said RDO., for taking necessary action. He further stated that his enquiries revealed that the petitioner is having landed properties in Nimmagadda and Gadabapalem villages; that the persons mentioned in the petition filed by the petitioner belong to CPI (M) party; and that they are interfering with the petitioner’s peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said lands. It further stated that in his report he requested the RDO., to bind over all the persons, mentioned in the petition, under Section 107 Cr.P.C., for maintaining peace and tranquility. The respondents have not come out with the stand whether the allegations contained in the petition dated 5-10-2007, filed by the petitioner, disclose commission of any cognizable offence or not. If the petitioner is not satisfied with the steps taken by the respondents, liberty is given to her to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 190 read with Section 200 Cr.P.C., as the said course is appropriate as held by the Supreme Court in Aleque Padamsee Vs. Union of India - (2007) 6 SCC 171. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J 24-4-2008 MNR