THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA Writ Petition No.26885 of 2009 ORDER: When the matter is taken up, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition. The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent in registering a case in Crime No.71 of 2005 under Sections 498-A, 494, 495 r/w 34, 109 and 114 of IPC and consequently, filing charge sheet in C.C.No.692 of 2005 on the file of the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku, West Godavari District, as illegal and arbitrary. This Court, on 09.12.2009 while issuing notice before admission, granted two weeks’ time to the learned Government Pleader for Home to get instructions and directed that the petitioner need not appear before the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tanuku, West Godavari District in connection with C.C.No.692 of 2005. Today, it is brought to the notice of this Court that as the petitioner having failed in getting the criminal proceedings quashed, filed the present writ petition and obtained interim orders. That in view of pendency of the writ petition, the CC could not be proceeded further. That he succeeded to drag the matter since 2005. The C.C., is of the year 2005. The petitioner, having failed to get the C.C., proceedings quashed on the criminal side, filed the present writ petition. The petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, did not disclose the factum of his earlier initiating quash proceedings and his failure to get them quashed. Without disclosing the fact of his being unsuccessful in getting the C.C., proceedings quashed, filed the present writ petition, and obtained interim stay of his appearance in the C.C., which is nothing but abuse of process of the Court. Even though the petitioner intends to withdraw the writ petition, but I am not inclined to permit him to withdraw the same unconditionally, and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition by imposing costs, which are quantified at Rs.1,000/-. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the petitioner shall pay costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to the second respondent. ___________________ N.V. RAMANA, J. Date:13.07.2010 VGB