1 APHC010361772025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 18564/2025 Between: 1. SABBELLA SURYANARAYANA REDDY, SON OF BALA KRISHNA REDDY, AGE 36 YEARS. RESIDENT OF D.NO.14-32, PALA BAZAR ROAD, PRASADAMPADU, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, O/O. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NEAR N.H.5, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VIJAYAWADA, O/O. THE COMMISSIONERATE, SURYARAOPET, VIJAYAWADA. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PATAMATA POLICE STATION, VIJAYAWADA. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ELURU SESHA MAHESH BABU 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 conducting enquiry in accordance with G.O. Ms.No.288 issued by Home PS and C A2 Department dated 06. 11.2010 in pursuance of the representation of the petitioner dated 05.08.2024 in which the petitioner against the police personnel who interfered with the civil disputes and converted the same into criminal case by registering the FIR in Crime No.431 of 2019 dated 13.05.2019 for the offences U/s 448, 384, 2 506 and 509 IPC r/w 34 of IPC which is highly illegal arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to conduct enquiry by conidering the representation of the petitioner dated 05.08.2024” 2. Heard Sri E.Sesha Mahesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the police have converted a civil matter into a criminal case. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No. 431 of 2019, which involves alleged offences under Sections 448, 384, 506 and 509 read with 34 IPC. Learned counsel further submits that, after due investigation, the police filed a charge sheet for the offences under Sections 506 and 509 of the IPC. The Court has taken cognizance for the said offences, and the case is still pending before the learned IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. Learned counsel further would submit that the petitioner has made a representation to Respondent No. 2, requesting necessary action against the police officer who registered the crime, in light of G.O.Ms.No. 288, dated 06.11.2010. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner is making false allegation against the police officer and there is no substance in the petition, only to blackmail the Government Officials and harass them the present petition has been filed. 5. Since the case which is alleged against the petitioner is still pending before the competent Court for consideration and the trial is not completed 3 and there is no such finding supporting the version of the petitioner, the petition is devoid of merits. 6. In that view, the Wirt Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to raise such contentions at appropriate time before appropriate forum. 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: 01.09.2025 Asr 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.18564 of 2025 Dt.01.09.2025 Asr