Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 14106 (AP)

PAKANATI CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/9483/2024 · 2025-08-04

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010172822024 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. 9483/2024 Between: PAKANATI CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY, S/O.VENKA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O.SWARNA ROAD, VYKUNTAPURAM, CHIRALA TOWN, BAPATLA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BAPATLA DISTRICT AT BAPATLA. 3. SUB DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SDSP, CHIRALA TOWN, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 4. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CL, CHIRALA CIRCLE, CHIRALA TOWN AND MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 5. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHIRALA I TOWN POLICE STATION, CHIRALA TOWN, BAPATLA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NAGA PRAVEEN VANKAYALAPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in opening and continue the rowdy sheet on the file of 5th respondent police station to close watch of the petitioner life and respondents 4 and 5 repeatedly calling him to the police station without there being any reason, as illegal, irregular. Irrational, without jurisdiction and violative of provisions of Andhra Pradesh Police Standing Orders 2 and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently quash the rowdy sheet on the file of 5th respondent police station to close watch of the petitioner life and respondents 4 and 5 repeatedly calling the petitioner to the police station without there being any reason and not to interfere with his liberty in any manner in the interest of justice.” 2. Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, by way of counter affidavit, would submit that there are no cases pending against the Petitioner and to curb and curtail the unlawful activities of the Petitioner in the vicinity, Rowdy Sheet No.955 on the file of Chirala I Town Police Station, Bapatla District was opened against the Petitioner. 3. Sri Naga Praveen Vankayalapati, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, no cases are pending against the Petitioner and hence, the impugned rowdy sheet opened against the Petitioner may be closed. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of and the Rowdy Sheet No.955 on the file of Chirala I Town Police Station, Bapatla District, against the Petitioner is hereby set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:05.08.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.9483 of 2024 Dt.05.08.2025 Dinesh