Brahma Kumari Sunanda, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. By Its Prl. Secretary,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION Nos.6714 and 6728 of 2015 BETWEEN Brahma Kumari Sunanda ... PETITIONER AND The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Home), Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.

...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:

COMMON ORDER:

Heard.

2. Petitioner, who is a teacher in Prajapati Brahma Kumaris Eswarriya Viswavidyalaya, complained to the police that one Alavala Venkata Subba Rao has been defaming and damaging the status and reputation of the petitioner on the allegation that the petitioner had borrowed some amount from him. Petitioner denies any such money transaction and complained that using criminal force and unparliamentary language; the said Venkata Subba Rao is blackmailing her and sought action to be taken against him for rank forgery, mischief, intimidation and blackmailing. Alleging that in spite of her complaint dated 02.03.2015 no action was taken by respondent No.3, the present writ petition is filed.

3. Based on the very same complaint and alleging that the aforesaid person is pressuring the petitioner, a relief for grant of police protection is sought by the same petitioner in W.P.No.6728 of 2014.

In both the writ petitions the person against whom the allegations are made is not impleaded as respondent.

4. Learned Government Pleader for Home has, however, received instructions in both the writ petitions and it is stated that on the complaint of the petitioner, the said Venkata Subba Rao was called to the police station on 18.03.2015 and he produced the promissory note said to have been signed by the petitioner. Respondent No.3 states that he has counseled both the parties and on verifying the documents, they were advised to approach appropriate civil court as the matter is of civil nature. In view of the said advice, respondent No.3 would state that no case is registered on the complaint of the petitioner. Copy of the handwritten statement of the said Subba Rao dated 18.03.2015 is produced along with the corresponding legal notices exchanged between petitioner's counsel and said Subba Rao's counsel.

5. In view of the fact that respondent No.3 has already called and counseled both the parties, at the moment, no further action is warranted on the petitioner's complaint and if and

when there is any future cause of action, petitioner is at liberty to take such appropriate further steps as advised.

The writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J March 31, 2015 LMV