Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18566 (AP)

MARRI HARI BABU YADAV v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/16910/2020 · 2025-09-08

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010256642020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16910/2020 Between: MARRI HARI BABU YADAV, S/O. LATE VENKATESWARLU AGE. 38, HINDU, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O. VELPURU VILLAGE, SAVALYA PURAM MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522646. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SAVALYA PURAM MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NAGESWARA RAO V 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 of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not registering the Crime on my complaint dated 28.05.2020 on the file of 3rd respondent as being illegal, irregular and amounts to non-discharge of legal obligation conferred on the respondents under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to register the crime and prosecute the accused persons for appropriate offences and penal provisions of law.” 2 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri V.Nageswara Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that no further orders are required in this matter as the relief sought has become infructuous. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that the 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:09.09.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.16910 of 2020 Dt.09.09.2025 Dinesh