BHUMIREDDY PAPIREDDYGARI CHENNAMMA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/19043/2025 · 2025-07-24
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 26244 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 26244 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010370622025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19043/2025 Between:
1. BHUMIREDDY PAPIREDDYGARI CHENNAMMA, W/O VENKATA SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, D.NO. 12/290, KADAPA ROAD, NEAR NANDHI COLLEGE MYDUKUR MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT,
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH
2. THE SUPER INTENDING OFFICER, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT.
3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MYDUKUR POLICE STATION, YSR DISTRICT.
4. DASAREDDYGARI SURESH, S/O. SUBBA REDDY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/O. MYDUKURU, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT.
5. SREERAM PRATAP, S/O. PRABHAKAR, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/O. PRODDUTUR, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT.
6. BHUMIREDDY RAGHU RAMAIAH, S/O. LAKSHMAMMA GARI PEDDA VENKATANA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O. KRISHNAPURAM, MYDUKUR MANDAL, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT.
7. ACK CHENDRAYUDU, S/O. KODAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O. VOINIPETA, MYDUKUR MANDAL, Y.S.R. KADAPA 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 issue a Writ It is therefore prayed that this Honble Court
Order or Direction may be pleased to issue a Writ or particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent no. 2 and 3 in closing the case without a proper investigation, inquiry, or intimation to the victim, and labeiing it false case in FIR No. 212/2024 as a registered under Sections 323, 324, 354 read wrth 34 IPC, on the fiie of Mydukur Poiice Station, Y.S.R. Kadapa District without any proper investigation, inquiry, or informing the Petitioner is iilegal, arbitrary and violations of Article 14, 21 300A and consequently direct the respondent no.2 3. to conduct a thorough and fair investigation into the matter in labeling it as a false case FIR no. 212/2024 on the file of Mydukur police Station, Y.S.R. Kadapa District fourthwith and pass
2
IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 respondent no.2 & 3, to conduct a thorough and fair investigation into the matter in labeling it as a false case FIR no. 212/2024 on the file of Mydukur police Station, Y.S.R. Kadapa District pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. KRISHNA RAO M 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 It is therefore prayed that this Honble Court Order or Direction may be pleased to issue a Writ or particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no 2 and 3 in closing the case without a proper investigation inquiry or intimation to the victim and labeling it false case in FIR No.212/2024 as a registered under Sections 323 324 354 read with 34 IPC on the fiie of Mydukur Poiice Station Y.S.R Kadapa District without any proper investigation inquiry or informing the Petitioner is iilegal arbitrary and violations of Article 14 21 300A and consequently direct the respondent no.2 3 to conduct a thorough and fair investigation into the matter in labeling it as a false case FIR no 212/2024 on the file of Mydukur police Station Y.S.R. Kadapa District fourthwith.”
2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the police, without conducting a proper investigation, closed the case in Crime No. 212 of 2024. Though, an appropriate remedy is available to the petitioner before the appropriate forum.
4. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to work out her remedies before appropriate forum in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.
3
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:25.07.2025 ASR
4
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
W.P.No.19043 of 2025
Dt.25.07.2025
Asr