Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 28201 (AP)

Chintham Reddy Ramachandra Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/20641/2025 · 2025-08-05

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010401172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 20641/2025 Between: 1. CHINTHAM REDDY RAMACHANDRA REDDY,, S/O SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-135-9-112, JAMMIREDDY COLONY, BANAGANAPALLI, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 2. CHINTHAM REDDY MADHAVI,, W/O RAMACHANDRA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/OD.NO.1-135-9-112, JAMMIREDDY COLONY, BANAGANAPALLI, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 3. KALUVAI LAKSHMI DIVYA,, W/O CHENNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O D.NO.3/21, PATHAATLUR, ATLUR MANDAL, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT, KADAPA. 3. THE SHO, C.K. DINNE POLICE STATION KADAPA, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. C VENKATA RAMANA REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, R/O BUGGALAPALLI VILLAGE, C.K. DINNE MANDAL, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT. 2 ...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 to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in interfering with the civil dispute at the instance of the 4th Respondent and forcing the Petitioners to settle the dispute with the 4th Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent not to intervene in the civil dispute and not to harass the Petitioners to settle the dispute with the 4th Respondent 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 3rd Respondent not to intervene in the civil dispute and not to harass the Petitioners to settle the dispute with the 4th Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. A SYAM SUNDAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 20641 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in interfering with the civil dispute at the instance of the 4th Respondent and forcing the Petitioners to settle the dispute with the 4th Respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent not to intervene in the civil dispute and not to harass the Petitioners to settle the dispute with the 4th Respondent…” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that basing on the complaint of the respondent No.4, the petitioners were called to the police station for preliminary enquiry only. No crime is registered against the petitioners. He would further submit that the police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioners and the respondent No.4. 3. Sri A.Syam Sundar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 4. Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. However, the police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents. 4 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 06.08.2025 UPS 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.20641 of 2025 Dated.06.08.2025 UPS 156