IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.7434 of 2009 Between: B.Krishnaiah S/o.B.Lakshmaiah R/o.H.No.29-1500/2/B, Durga Nilayam, West Kakatiya Nagar, Secunderabad-26 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad 3 The Station House Officer, L.B.Nagar Police Station, Cyberabad. .....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 appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to conduct the enquiry through proper channel on the 2nd respondent and take necessary action. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.SRINATH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION No.7434 of 2009 ORDER: It is the case of the petitioner that he was unnecessarily harassed by the 3rd respondent- Station House Officer, L.B. Nagar Police Station, Cyberabad, in the guise of investigation of a crime with which he was not at all related, and was detained in the police station from 26.03.2009 to 02.04.2009, without there being any reason. It is his further case that, still, the 3rd respondent is calling him over phone, asking him to come to police station and threatening him with dire consequences. It is the grievance of the petitioner that he submitted a representation to the 2nd respondent- Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, on 06.04.2009, bringing to his notice the acts of the 3rd respondent and asking him to take necessary action in the matter, but no action has been taken till date. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that, in view of filing of this writ petition and the oral observations made by this Court on 09.04.2009, the respondent police are not calling the petitioner to police station and there is no harassment whatsoever by the police. However, he reports no instructions as to the action taken by the 2nd respondent on the representation made by the petitioner. In the circumstances, the 2nd respondent- Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, is directed to consider the representation dated 06.04.2009 submitted by the petitioner and take necessary action expeditiously. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA 17th April, 2009 IBL