1 APHC010357782025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 18015/2025 Between: 1. NAGA PRASHANTH ADAVENI, S/O. KRISHNA KUMAR ADAVENI, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O. SRI SAPTHA GIRI TOWERS, MADHAVI NAGAR RD.NO.5, VENKATARAMANA COLONY, KURNOOL. 2. K SOWMYA PAVANI,, D/O. K. GURU PRAKASH, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O. 8/370, SWAYAM SEVAK ROAD, PRODDATUR, CUDDAPAH ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HOME ME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI,GUNTUR DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KURNOOL. 3. THESTATION HOUSE OFFICE, IV TOWN POLICE STATION, KURNOOL 4. TALANKI SAI DINESH KUMAR SETTY, S/O. MURALI PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/O. 12-47-1, KOTHAPETA, DONE MANDAL, DHONE 5. D KRISHNA KUMARI, D/O. MURALI PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O. 12-47-1, KOTHAPETA, DONE MANDAL, DHONE ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. S V RUTHVIK 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 MANDAMUSor any other appropriate Writ Order or Direction declaring the action of Respondents No.2 and 3 in coercing the Petitioners to settle a purely civil dispute 2 as illegal arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 19 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India and Consequently direct Respondents No 2 and 3 not to interfere in any civil disputes between the Petitioners and Respondents No 4 and 5 except strictly in accordance with law” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that police are interfering with the civil disputes pending the petitioners and the respondents 4 and 5. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that there are disputes between the parties as the petitioners failed to provide the promised loan to respondents 4 and 5. He further would submit that no crime is registered against the petitioners till date. 5. For ready reference, the written instructions are extracted hereunder: “when the petitioners failed to provide the promised loan to respondents 4 and 5, the respondents approached the SHO, Kurnool IV Town Police Station by submitting a representation of their grievance to the Superintendent of Police, Kurnool. As per the directions of the Superintendent of Police, Kurnool, the petitioners were summoned to the police station questioned regarding the matter. During the enquiry, the petitioner voluntarily admitted that he had received the amount from respondent 4 and 5 under the pretext of arranging a loan for Rs.2croses. Furthermore, he voluntarily assured that he would issue cheques equivalent to the amount received from the respondents. Except it, no violation of his rights was caused at the police station and the police only summoned and questioned him base on the complaint given by the respondents. The police did not coerce him in any manner to issue cheques in favour of respondents 4 and 5..” 6. Learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 3 7. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed not to interfere with the civil disputes pending between both the parties. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. __________________________________ Dr.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 01.08.2025 Asr 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.18015 of 2025 Dt.01.08.2025 Asr