Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 19466 (AP)

Shaim Gouse Samdani v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/18006/2020 · 2025-08-18

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010272642020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 18006/2020 Between: 1. SHAIM GOUSE SAMDANI, S/O. ABDUL SHUKUR AGED 48 YEARS, R/O. 7-111, MAIN ROAD, KOTA, KONDAVEEDU, EDLAPADU, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. MOHAMMAD NUR, S/O. ABDUL KHUDDIS AGED 49 YEARS, R/O. 7- 89, NEAR MASEED, KOTA, KONDAVEEDU, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. SHAIK RAHEEMA, W/O. NOOR AGED 40 YEARS, R/O. KOTA, KONDAVEEDU, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. SHAIK SALAM, S/O. HABIBULLA AGED 38 YEARS, R/O. 19-3-4E, NEAR MARUTHI MAHALAKSHMI, PIDUGURALLA, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. SAYYED MOOSA, S/O. PEER AGED 28 YEARS, R/O. KOTA, KONDAVEEDU, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR RURAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, EDLAPADU P.S., GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2 4. DARMYASI SRIHARI SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, EDLAPADU P.S., GUNTUR 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 topleased to grant an order, direction or writ, more so in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the high handed action of the 3rd Respondent in harassing and threatening the Petitioners in pursuance of complaint in Crime No. 133 of 2020 on the file of Edlapadu Police Station, Guntur District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to me under Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India with a consequential direction to the 2nd Respondent to take disciplinary action against the 4th Respondent and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the 3rd Respondent to not to harass the Petitioners in pursuant to Cr.No.133/2020 on the file of Edlapadu Police Station, Guntur District and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. ARUN SHOWRI GORREMUCHU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to grant an order, direction or writ, more so in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the high handed action of the 3rd Respondent in harassing and threatening the Petitioners in pursuance of complaint in Crime No. 133 of 2020 on the file of Edlapadu Police Station, Guntur District as illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to me under Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India with a consequential direction to the 2nd Respondent to take disciplinary action against the 4th Respondent and pass...…” 2. Heard Sri G.Arun Showri, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the under the guise of crime which is registered against the petitioners, the police are calling the petitioners to the police station and threatening them to settle dispute between them and the unofficial respondent. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that the police are not harassing the petitioners and the Court may pass appropriate orders. 5. Considering the submissions made, this writ petition is disposed of. However the police are directed to follow due process of law when calling the petitioners to the police station regarding the crime registered against them and the police are directed not to interfere in the civil dispute between the petitioners and the unofficial respondent. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATAJYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 19.08.2025 MH 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 81 W.P.No.18006 of 2020 Dated.19.08.2025 MH