Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 26499 (AP)

CHITIKELA KRISHNA MURTHY v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/19038/2025 · 2025-07-27

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010375432025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19038/2025 Between: 1. CHITIKELA KRISHNA MURTHY, S/O CH NOOKARAKU, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-129, K.O MALLAVARAM VILLAGE, TUNI MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAKINADA DISTRICT, KAKINADA. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANAKAPALLE DISTRICT, ANAKAPALLE. 4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PEDDAPURAM, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 5. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NARSIPATNAM, ANAKAPALLE DISTRICT. 6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TUNI, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 7. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAKKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLE DISTRICT. 2 8. THE S L OF POLICE, TUNI RURAL POLICE STATION, TUNI, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 9. THE S L OF POLICE, KOTAURATIA POLICE STATION, NAKAPALLI MANDAL, ANAKAPALLE DISTRICT. 10. THE TAHSILDAR, KOTANANDURU MANDAL, KOTANANDURU, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 11. SURLA VENKATA LAKSHMI, W/O ADINARAYANA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O D.NO.5-6-1, 3RDLINE, BANK COLONY, EEGALA VARI STREET, TUNI VILLAGE MANDAL, KAKINADA DISTRICT. 12. SURLA VENKATA VARAHA RAJESWARI, D/O ADINARAYANA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS. DOCTOR, R/O BAMA NAGAR, 2NDCROSS STREET, PARK TOWN EXTENTION, MADURI, TAMIL NADU STATE. ...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 writ, order or orders specially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the acts of the Respondents No.6 to 9 herein in interfering in the civil disputes between petitioner and the Respondents No. 11 & 12 herein, by also calling petitioner to police stations and also threatening petitioner to hand over the vacant possession of the house and the landed properties i.e suit schedule properties to the Respondents No. 11 & 12 immediately, without their being any Orders of the Competent Civil Courts, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and misuse of powers vested with the office of Respondents No.6 to 9 and consequently desist the Respondents No.6 to 9 from calling petitioner to the police stations and threatening to hand over the vacant possession of the house and the landed properties i.e suit schedule properties to the Respondents No. 11 & 12 immediately and pass such other order or orders. 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 to direct the Respondents No.6 to 9 herein not to interfere in the civil disputes 3 between petitioner and the Respondents No.11 & 12 herein, by also not to call the petitioner to the police stations, by also threatening the petitioner to hand over the vacant possession of the house and the landed properties i.e suit schedule properties to the Respondents No.11 & 12 herein and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. T V JAGGI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for the respondents 1 to 9. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that respondent Nos.6 to 9 are calling the petitioner to the police station and thereby insisting him to settle the civil disputes with the respondents 11 and 12. Learned counsel would further submit that a direction may be given to the respondent-police not to interfere in the civil disputes. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that the respondent-police are not interfering in the civil disputes. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent-police not to call the petitioner to the police station 4 and not to interfere in the civil disputes between the petitioners and unofficial respondents. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 28.07.2025 ARR 5 262 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19038/2025 Dt.28.07.2025 ARR