APHC010131022020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 7978/2020 Between: 1. CHINIGE SRIKANTH, S/O YESOBU, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, PRIVATE EMPLOYEE. 2. CHINIGE VENKATA RATNAM, W/O YESOBU, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF D.NO.7-980(16/ 1), 1ST LINE, SIVAPRASAD COLONY, M.M.DONKA, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, , PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ONGOLE. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TALUKA POLICE STATION, ONGOLE, PRAKSAMA DISTRICT. 4. CHINIGE GARIKAMUKKALA PRAVALLIKA, W/O SRIKANTH, R/O D.NO.7-980(16/1), 1ST LINE, SIVAPRASAD COLONY, M.M.DONKA, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. SRI DEVARAPALLI BABU RAO, HOME GUARD/DRIVER, TALUKA POLICE STATION, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM 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 mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent and his police personnel in interfering with the matrimonial and civil disputes between the 1st petitioner and the 4th respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to interfere into the disputes between the petitioners and the 4th respondent Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KOCHIRI RAJA SHEKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2 The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioners seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “ ... to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent and his police personnel in interfering with the matrimonial and civil disputes between the 1st petitioner and the 4th respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to interfere into the disputes between the petitioners and the 4th respondent ....” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that respondent police, particularly respondent No.3 are interfering with the family disputes between the petitioners and respondents 4 and 5 and prays that necessary directions may be given to respondent Police. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Police on instructions would submit that the respondent Police never interfered with family disputes of the petitioners and unofficial respondents as alleged in this Writ Petition and that this Court may pass appropriate directions and may dispose of this Writ Petition. 4. In that view, it is apposite to direct respondent Police not to interfere in the family disputes of the petitioners and the unofficial respondents except following due process of law if so required. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 7978 of 2020 29.07.2025 Mjl /*