IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.9216 of 2009 Between: 1 Mohammad Manazir Ahmed s/o. Mohd. Amjad Miyan R/o. H.No. 7-1-77, Sitarampet, Tandur, R.R. District. 2 Muskan Fatima @ Karnam Divya W/o. Mohammad Manazir Ahmed R/o. H.No. 7-1-77, Sitarampet, Tandur, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Station House Officer Tandur P.S. R.R. Disitrict. 2 Karnam Govind Rao S/o. Hanumantha Rao R/o. H.No. 3-2-198/1, Venkateswara Colony, Tandur, R.R. Disitrict. 3 Purushotham Rao S/o. Hanumantha Rao R/o. H.No. 3-2-198/1, Venkateswara Colony, Tandur, R.R. Disitrict. 4 Rama Krishna Rao S/o. Hanumantha Rao R/o. H.No. 3-2-198/1, Venkateswara Colony, Tandur, R.R. Disitrict. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners:SMT. S.MADHAVI FOR MR.C.RAGHU Counsel for Respondent No.1:AGP FOR HOME ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to declare the inaction of respondent No.1 in interfering with the life and liberty of the petitioners and also the parents of petitioner No.1 at the instance of respondent Nos.2 to 4, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioners have got married without the consent of respondent Nos.2 to 4, who are father and paternal uncles respectively of petitioner No.2. They alleged that as their marriage was against the wishes of respondent Nos.2 to 4, they have been haunting the petitioners and prevailing upon respondent No.1 to harass them and the parents of petitioner No.1. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submitted that the complaint given by respondent No.2 was investigated into and as it was found that the petitioners are majors and petitioner No.2 has got converted into Islam, the investigation was closed and further action on the complaint given by respondent No.2 was dropped by reporting the complaint as given on mistake of fact. She also specifically submitted, on instructions, that respondent No.1 has not been interfering with the life and liberty of the petitioners or the parents of petitioner No.1. These submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader are taken on record and the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous with liberty to the petitioners to seek revival of this writ petition in the event respondent No.1 interferes with their life and personal liberty or the parents of petitioner No.1 in future. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.12072 of 2009 filed by the petitioners for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 3rd JUNE, 2009. kvni