IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 17828 of 2005 Between: Smt.Cheerka Radhika (Alias) Lavanya Reddy W/o.C.Narasimha Reddy R/o.P.No.17 and 18 Sanjeevaiah Co-operative Society New Bowenpally, Secunderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Sub Inspector of Police Women Police Station, Saroornagar R.R District,. 2 The station House Officer Inspector of Police P.S. Saroornagar R.R. 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, direction particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to take necessary legal action/steps against the Accused No.1 to 5 in Crime No.902/2004 of P.S Saroornagar in accordance with the law and pass. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: The only grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have not taken any diligent action and no necessary steps have been taken to arrest the accused in Crime No.902 of 2004 on the file of the Police Station, Saroornagar. A counter has been filed by the respondents stating that on receipt of the complaint, a case in Crime No.902 of 2004 for the offences under Sections 498-A, 383, 406, 506 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been registered on 22.11.2004 and investigation has been taken up by the police and after completion of investigation, the first respondent vide letter dated 14.07.2005 sought for permission to file final report stating that it is a case of ‘lack of evidence’. It is stated that after obtaining permission, final report has been filed before the II Metropolitan Magistrate at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad on 03.08.2005. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that if the petitioner is aggrieved of filing final report treating it as ‘lack of evidence’, it is open to him to file a protest petition or question the same. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:24.04.2008 Ccm To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MPL}