APHC010394322025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 20386/2025 Between: 1. GAMPALA GANGADHARA RAO, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. NAGABHUSHANAM, H.NO.4-80, PERUKALAPUDI VILLAGE, DUGGIRALA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH- 522330. 2. GAMPALAVENKATALAXMI, AGED 34 YEARS, W/O. GAMPALAGANGADHARA RAO, H.NO.4-80, PERUKALAPUDI VILLAGE, DUGGIRALA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-522330. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NALLAPADU POLICE STATION, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, DUGGIRALA POLICE STATION, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MANGALAGIRI RURAL POLICE STATION, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6. GAMPALAKUMARI, AGED 36 YEARS, W/O. LATE SIVAIAH, PERUKALAPUDI VILLAGE, DUGGIRALA MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-522330. 7. GUMMANAGESWARA RAO, AGED 58 YEARS, R/O. VENIGANDLA VILLAGE, PEDDAKAKANI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 8. GUMMANAGARAJU, AGED 38 YEARS, R/O. VENIGANDLA VILLAGE, PEDDAKAKANI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. THATHIREDDY ASHOK SRIVASTAVA 2 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 a) Declaring the actions of Respondent No. 3 to 5 in interfering with the pending civil dispute arising out of the registered sale deed dated 02.07.2025 bearing Doc.No.7516/2025 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional b) Direct the Respondents to refrain from coercing the Petitioners to settle the dispute extra judicially, c) Direct the Respondents 2 to 5 not to call the petitioners to the Police Station without issuing notice, d) Direct the Respondents 2 to 5 to take appropriate action against Respondents 6 to 8 for causing criminal intimidation, harassment, and abuse of police process against the Petitioners.” 2. Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that, based on the complaint lodged by Respondent No.6, a case in Crime No.744 of 2025 has been registered against the Petitioner No.1 and in that connection, Petitioner No.1 was called to the Police Station for enquiry. It is further submitted that the Police neither coerced nor threatened Petitioner No.1. 3. Sri Thathireddy Ashok Srivastava, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of giving liberty to the Petitioners to work out their remedies by filing appropriate application before appropriate forum. 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:13.08.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.20386 of 2025 Dt.13.08.2025 Dinesh