Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 10830 (AP)

Peddi Narasimha Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/7711/2020 · 2025-08-04

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010123342020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 7711/2020 Between: 1. PEDDI NARASIMHA RAO, , S/O. SUBBA RAO, AGED 58 YEARS, R/O. BANDLAMMA GUDI STREET, NANDIRAJU THOTA VILLAGE AND POST, BAPATLA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR RURAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT AT GUNTUR. 3. INSPECTOR OF POLICE, , BAPATLA TOWN POLICE STATION, BAPATLA TOWN AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BAPATLA TOWN POLICE STATION, BAPATLA TOWN AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. THIRUPATHI RAO, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, WORKING AS CONSTABLE, BAPATLA. TOWN POLICE STATION, 6. GAALI UDAY BHASKAR, S /O. NARAYANA RAO, R/O. D.NO.6-9-121, 15TH WARD, SRUNGARAPURAM, BAPATLA TOWN AND MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 7. NAMA SHASHIKANTH, , S/ O. VENKATESWRA RAO, RIO. D NO.9-5- 19, 4TH WARD, RAILPET, BAPATLA TOWN AND MANDAL, GUNTUR 2 DISTRICT. 8. BEERAM SURESH BABU, , S/O. ANKAMMA NAIDU, R/O. D.NO.16-1- 194, 4TH WARD, L B NAGAR, OLD GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents 3 and 5 in repeatedly insisting me to appear before their authority and yielding pressure on me to settle the civil disputes with the respondents 6 to 8 in connection with the property covered by D No.829/12 in an extent of Ac.0.20 cents of East Bapatla Village, Guntur District, as illegal, irregular, irrational, without any authority of law and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with my personal liberty nor call to their police station IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 3 to 5 not to insist me to appear before their authority nor interfere in any manner with my personal liberty, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NARESH KUMAR GUNDAPU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 7711/2020 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents 3 and 5 in repeatedly insisting me to appear before their authority and yielding pressure on me to settle the civil disputes with the respondents 6 to 8 in connection with the property covered by D No.829/12 in an extent of Ac.0.20 cents of East Bapatla Village, Guntur District, as illegal, irregular, irrational, without any authority of law and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with my personal liberty nor call to their police station…” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that the respondent- police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 4. Recording the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to recourse his remedies before the appropriate forum. No order as to costs. 4 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 05.08.2025 UPS 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.7711 of 2020 Dated.05.08.2025 UPS 153