Hari Gopala Krishna Murthy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
WP/24408/2020 · 2025-08-31
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 26013 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 26013 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010366962020
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: 24408/2020 Between:
1. HARI GOPALA KRISHNA MURTHY, S/O. H-D. PRASAD RAO, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS,
2. SMT. LAKSHMI SUJATHA, W/O. HARI GOPALA KRISHNA MURTHY AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC- HOUSEHOLD, (BOTH R/O. FLAT NO. 104, ROYAL ARCADES, GANDHINAGAR, HYDERABAD - 500 080, IN PREMISES NO. 1-1-780/A/5)
...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
HOME DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PS V TOWN, NORTH ZONE, SINGH NAGAR, THOTAVARI VEEDHI, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. M/S J P PROPERTIES, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, SMT. SHAILAJA GUDIWADA W/O. K. KOTESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS,
5. SRI K KOTESWARA RAO, S/O. K. SUBBA RAO, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC- CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, (BOTH ARE R/O. C/O.
H. NO. 8-3-672/15, FLAT NO. 202, MANU ARCEDIA, YOUSUFGUDA,
2
HYDERABAD - 500 073). 6. NALLAGANDLA SUBA RAO, S/O. POORNACHANDRA RAO, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS, R/O. 23-16-14, NAGESHWAR PANTHULU LANE, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 issue a Writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents 2 86 3 in interfering in the civil disputes in relation to the subject property at the instance of the unofficial Respondents is challenged in this Writ Petition as being arbitrary, illegal, violative of Art. 14, 19 (1) (g), 21 86 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the official Respondents not to harass the Petitioners or interfere with the rights of the Petitioner over Plot Nos. 44, 45, 46 8i 47, admeasuring 744 Sq. Yards forming part of Sy.
No. 13/3, situated at Nandamuri Nagar, Vijayawada 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 not to insist or summon the Petitioners to Vijayawada or Police Station without following the due procedure of law and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. V VENKATA NAGA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. K SAI SUBHA SRI
2. GP FOR HOME
3. INAKOLLU VENKATESWARLU
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 issue a Writ, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondents 2 and 3 in interfering in the civil disputes in relation to the subject property at the instance of the unofficial Respondents is challenged in this Writ Petition as being arbitrary, illegal, violative of Art. 14, 19 (1) (g), 21 86 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the official Respondents not to harass the Petitioners or interfere with the rights of the Petitioner over Plot Nos. 44, 45, 46 8i 47, admeasuring 744 Sq. Yards forming part of Sy. No. 13/3, situated at Nandamuri Nagar, Vijayawada and pass....”
2. Heard Sri V.Venkata Naga Raju, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the police are interfering in the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that police are not interfering in the civil disputes.
5. Recording the same, this writ petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes. 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:01.09.2025 MH
4
5
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
258
W.P.No.24408 of 2020
Dt.01.09.2025
MH