APHC010325742018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 14819/2018 Between: 1. K.A. SUDHAKARA REDDY,, S/O. ANJINA REDDY, AGED 58 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.4-116B, K. BASAVANAPALLI, KIRIKERA, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANANTAPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, II TOWN POLICE STATION, HINDUPUR, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT. 4. BALACHANDRA GUPTA, S/O. SATHYANARAYANA GUPTA, AGED MAJOR, R/O. D.NO.8-3-324, MAIN BAZAR, BHAJANA MANDIR, HINDUPUR TOWN, ANANTAPUR 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 to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus challenging the action of 3rd respondent in threatening the petitioner to pay Rs.6,50,000/- in favour of 4th respondent while interfering into civil disputes between the petitioner and 4th respondent without having any jurisdiction, is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to interfere into the civil disputes between the petitioner and 4th respondent and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N ASWARTHA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. P NARAHARI BABU 2 The Court made the following: ORDER: The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “ ... to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus challenging the action of 3rd respondent in threatening the petitioner to pay Rs.6,50,000/- in favour of 4th respondent while interfering into civil disputes between the petitioner and 4th respondent without having any jurisdiction, is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to interfere into the civil disputes between the petitioner and 4th respondent and to pass ....” 2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents on written instructions would submit that neither the petitioner was summoned to the police station nor threatened him to pay the money to respondent No.4 at any point of time. 3. The relevant portion of the written instructions is extracted as under: “... It is submitted that the petitioner never approached the Police Station. The 3rd respondent neither summoned the petitioner to the Police Station nor threatened him to pay the alleged amount of Rs.6,50,000/- to the 4th respondent at any point of time.” 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that recording the said submission, this Writ Petition may be disposed of. 5. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 14819 of 2018 15.07.2025 Mjl /*