IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL, TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 13495 OF 2010 BETWEEN: Mohd. Sarvar …PETITIONER AND The State of A.P. through Police, Wanaparthy Town, represented by Public Prosecutor and another. …RESPONDENTS The Court made the following: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.RAVI SHANKAR CRIMINAL PETITION No. 13495 OF 2010 O R D E R: Heard the petitioner’s counsel Sri M.Atchutha Reddy and also Miss Padmavathi, counsel for 2nd respondent. 2. A perusal of the allegations in the First Information Report would show that offences punishable under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act can be said to have been made out and of-course these allegations have to be ultimately verified by the concerned Investigating Officer. If charge sheet is filed, the truthfulness of the same has to be tested before the Court. It should be noted that several contentions have been raised by the petitioner’s counsel, but they relate to disputed questions of fact and they have to be adjudged only on evidence in a trial or in an enquiry before framing of charges in case police want to put the petitioner on trial. Hence in my opinion, this is not a fit case for interference under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. 3. Sri Atchutha Reddy however pointed that the petitioner is a Constable in the Central Reserve Police Force and that if he is arrested, he may loose his job and therefore he wanted a direction from this Court to the police not to arrest him. This Court cannot impose any fetter on the power of the police to effect an arrest. It is however made clear that the concerned Investigating Officer may have due regard to Section 41 of Criminal Procedure Code as it stands now in taking any action in respect of the arrest of the petitioner. __________________ N.RAVI SHANKAR, J Date: 19-04-2011. INL