IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 16311 of 2008 Between: D.Srinivas S/o.Ramaswamy H.No.1-7-750/A/5/1, Ramnagar,Hyderabad ..... PETITIONER AND The Station House officer, (Government of AP) Central Crime STation, Hyderabad .....RESPONDENT 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 an appropriate writ order or direction more in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent and his subordinates in calling the petitioner to the Police Station at all odd hours without there being any involvement in any crime much less the alleged Crime No.30/08 on his ﬁle as being illegal,arbitrary, and is in violation of Article 21 of the Constituiton of India and consequently direct the respondent not to harass the petitoner by calling to the police station without there being any crime registered against him and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.RAMCHANDER GOUD Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following at the stage of admission : ORAL ORDER: The Writ Petition is ﬁled alleging that without an involvement of the petitioner in Cr.No.30 of 2008 and without his being arrayed as an accused in FIR No.30 of 2008 dated 19.2.2008 on the ﬁle of the Central Crime Station, Hyderabad, he is being regularly summoned to the police station and harassed without following the due process of law and without lawful authority. The Crime No. 30 of 2008 alleging oﬀences under Sections 420, 406, 468, 471 IPC r/w 34 IPC was registered on the complaint of one M. Krishna Koteshwar, the Manager (Legal) of Shriram City Union Finance, wherein the names of certain accused are enumerated but not that of the petitioner. This is the position admitted by the learned Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf of the respondent. However, the learned Government Pleader would state that during the course of investigation into Cr.No.30 of 2008, on the basis of the statements made by the other accused, the involvement of the petitioner into the oﬀences which are subject to investigation in Cr.No.30 of 2008 was revealed and that steps are being taken to implicate the petitioner as an accused in Cr.No.30 of 2008 but till then the respondent would not summon the petitioner to the police station or otherwise interfere with his liberty. In the light of the above statement made on behalf of the respondent by the learned Government Pleader for Home, the grievance in the writ petition does not subsist. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of recording the submission of the learned Government Pleader for Home. There shall be no order as to costs. GODA RAGHURAM, J DATE: 29.08.2008 Note: CC as soon as possible Bo CVM