Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 16299 (AP)

Share Pathan Naziya Tabassun, v. State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/9376/2018 · 2025-07-21

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010214512018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 9376/2018 Between: SHARE PATHAN NAZIYA TABASSUN, W/O INTYAZ ALI KHAN, AGED 27 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 32/39, ALIMABAD STREET, RAYACHOTI TOWN, YSR KADAPA DIST. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RAYACHOTI U/G POLICE STATION, RAYACHOTI, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. SHAIK ANWAR BASHA, S/O MEIAH SAHEB, AGE 54 YEARS, R/O D.NO. 32/39, ALIMABAD STREET, RAYACHOTI TOWN, YSR KADAPA DIST. 5. SHAMSHEER PATHAN LIYAKATH ALI KHAN MASTAN, S/O NOT KNOWH AGE 58 YEARS, GOLD R/O D.NO. 12/44. MOHAMMEDPURA STREET, RAYACHOTI, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M. JAYARAM REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. D. KODANDARAMI REDDY 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 respondents in interfering with my life and personal liberty, as illegal, 2 arbitrary and violative of Article 19 and 21 of constitution of India and direct the respondents not to interfere with my life and personal liberty.” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri M.Jayaram Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that no further orders are required in this matter as the relief sought in this petition has become infructuous. 3. Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, would submit that Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is dismissed as the relief has become infructuous. 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:22.07.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.9376 of 2018 Dt.22.07.2025 Dinesh