IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.34498 of 2014 BETWEEN G.Vasantha AND ... PETITIONER The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. This writ petition is filed alleging harassment by respondent Nos.2 to 4 in taking action against the petitioner by sending police constables and calling the petitioner to attend the police station. Petitioner states that her husband was a taxi driver and obtained a loan from Tata Finance to a tune of Rs.3,30,000/- and he used to deposit Rs.16,100/- per month and already made down payment of Rs.1,70,000/-. It is alleged that petitioner’s husband obtained loan of Rs.1,00,000/- from respondent No.7 and for non-payment thereof, respondent No.7 is stated to be pressurizing the petitioner with the assistance of respondent Nos.4 to 6. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.
3. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, states that respondent No.7 approached respondent No.6 and made a complaint, dated 18.10.2014, wherein she alleged that after the death of her husband, petitioner’s husband stating that he was not married and developed intimacy with her and married her at Yadagirigutta, Nalgonda District and subsequently, he has taken away the gold and money from her and started harassing her by beating her and also causing mental agony. On receipt of the said complaint, GD entries were made and enquiries were initiated. During the course of enquiry, the husband of the petitioner was called to the police station on 19.10.2014 for the purpose of enquiry. However, subsequently, on the same day, respondent No.7 has made a written representation withdrawing the complaint, dated 18.10.2014 due to intervention of elders. In view of that, therefore, no further action is taken by the police and the allegations of the petitioner are denied.
4. In view of the above instructions, since the complaint itself is withdrawn by respondent No.7 nothing further survives for consideration in the writ petition.
Writ petition is, 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 November 19, 2014 LMV