APHC010188222020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 12080/2020 Between: 1. A VENKATEWARLU, FATHER NAME. BRAHMAIAH, AGE.54, R/O. SOLASA VILLAGE, EDLAPADU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRIC ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GUNTUR RANGE, GUNTUR 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RAJUPALEM POLICE STATION, RAJUPALEM, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. VENKATA PRASAD, PRESENTLY WORKING AS SHO RAJUPALEM P.S., RAJUPALEM, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N V R AMARNATH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 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 order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 2nd respondent in taking any action against the 4th respondent in the capacity of the 3rd respondent basing on my representation dated 06.07.2020 as per the G.O.Ms.288/2010 is as illegal arbitrary unjust and contrary to law and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to take appropriate action in the matter basing on my complaint dated 06.07.2020” 2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 2 3. Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that respondent No.2 filed counter in this matter. 4. For ready reference, the Paragraph No.4 of the counter is extracted hereunder: “It is submitted that, the allegations made against the S.I that he pressurized the petitioner to execute the sale deed in favour of Dodla Veeranjaneyulu and involved in civil matter etc. are not correct. During the course of enquiry conducted for purpose of ascertaining the factual position of the case on the complaint made by the petitioner, the Inspector of Police, Piduguralla Rural Circle secured the presence of the petitioner, examined him and recorded his statement. In his statement the petitioner clearly stated that Sri K.Venkata Prasad, S.I of Police, Rajupalem P.S never called him to police station and never abused him in filthy language and never beat him and pressurized him to register the land in favour of Danamma. Hence, it is clear that the S.I of Police not interfered in Civil matter as alleged.” 5. In that view, since there is no substance in the allegations made, the Writ Petition is dismissed. 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:01.09.2025 Asr 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.12080 of 2020 Dt.01.09.2025 Asr