Petitioner challenged alleged intimidation and domiciliary visits by respondents. Finding respondents merely investigating a private complaint filed by petitioner, the court held the cause does not survive and dismissed the petition as infructuous.
The writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO W.P.No.20942 of 2010
ORDER
In this writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents 3 and 4 are insisting that petitioner pay Rs.1,60,000/and Rs.90,000/- to the respondents 5 and 6 and that if he does not pay the said amount, they threatened that they would implicate him in false criminal case. They also alleged that they are paying domiciliary visits to petitioner’s house regularly and harassing the petitioner.
2. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents 3 to 6, the above allegation is denied and it is stated that Crime No.94 of 2010 under Section 323, 427, 506, read with 34 IPC was registered on the file of Amalapuram Police Station on 04-07-2010 at the instance of the petitioner against respondents 5 and 6 and only in respect of investigation into the said crime, the respondents 1 to 3 had caused some visits to be made to the house of the petitioner.
3. In view of the fact that the respondents have stated that they are only investigating into the private complaint filed by the petitioner and they had never interfered with the life and liberty of the petitioner, I am of the view that the cause in the writ petition does not survive.
4. Recording the above statement of the respondents 1 to 3 that they had never interfered with the life and liberty of the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
___________________________________ JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO
Date :21-06-2013
kvr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition survives given that respondents are only investigating a private complaint filed by the petitioner without interfering with his life or liberty.
Petitioner
Respondents 3 to 6
M.S. Ramachandra Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
