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 N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 3975 of 2009 Between: Penchala Srinivasa Rao S/o.Rajeshwar Rao R/o.H.No.3-1-777, Opposite Court Buildings, Karimnagar Karimnagar District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of police,Karimnagar Karimnagar District 2 The Circle Inspector of Police, I Town Police Station Karimnagar 3 Dr.V.Chandrasekhar ,M.S.(Ortho), S/o.Laskhminarayana C/o.Adithya Orthocare Doctors Street Karimnagar, Karimnagar District .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the anture of mandamus seeking directing to the respondent No.1 to cause an enquiry with regard to the interference by the 2nd respondent herein in collusion with the respondent No.3 herein in interfering with the civil dispute i.e.(recovery of amount of Rs.2,00,000/-) from the petitioner) and also to declare the action of the respondent No.2 in interfering with the matters of civil dispute between the petitioner and 3rd respondent herein more particularly for recovery of Rs.2,00,000/- as illegal, arbitrary,without jurisdiction and also violating Artilce, 14,21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent not interfere in civil dispute and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.VENKATESHWAR VARANASI Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : O R D E R:- The case of the petitioner is that there are civil disputes between him and the 3rd respondent with regard to recovery of an mount of Rs.2,00,000/- from him, and it is his grievance that the 2nd respondent- Circle Inspector of Police, in collusion with the 3rd respondent, is calling the petitioner to the police station frequently and interfering in civil disputes by directing him to pay the said amount to the 3rd respondent and posing threat to his life in case he fails to make the payment. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2. The learned Government Pleader for Home has admitted that there are civil disputes between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, but stated that the 2nd respondent never interfered in such disputes nor threatened the petitioner nor called him to the Police station at any time, and in fact, no crime is registered against the petitioner. In view of the above stand taken by the learned Government Pleader for Home, no orders need be passed in the writ petition, and the same is accordingly closed. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J 6th March, 2009 bcj