APHC010414282025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADES>I- AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, THE CHIEF JUSTIC^ AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI WRIT APPEAL NO: 893 OF 2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15"^f the Letters Patent against the order dt.11/07/2025 in W.P.No.16881/2025 on the file of the High Court.^ Between: 1. Shaik Asha Latha, W/o Vankadaru Harikrlshna Aged about 36 years Occ; Housewife R/o D No 74-24-24/1, Dhanekulavari Veedhi, Ashok Nagar, Vijayawada. 2. Vankadaru Harikrishna, S/o V Subhash Chandra Bose, Aged about 37 years, Occ: Business, R/o D No 74-24-24/1 Dhanekulavari Veedhi, Ashok Nagar, Vijayawada. ...Petitioners. AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary Home Department Secretariat Velagapudi Amaravati. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada Police Commissionerate Vijayawada NTR District. 3. The Station House Officer, Patamata Police Station Auto Nagar Vijayawada. 4. The Subinspector of Police, Patamata Police Station Auto Nagar Vijayawada. 5. Mahalakshmi Auto Ventures, A Registered Partnership with Registration No 287 of 2011 Dated 30 12 2011 on the file of the Registrar of Firms Vijayawada Having its office at 4026/115 Shram Nagar Labbipeta Vijayawada Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Managing Partner A Sakunt Mohan S/o Mohana Rama Dass Aged about 43 years Occ: Business R/o VijayawadaAndhra Pradesh 6. A Sakunt Mohan, S/o Mohana Rama Dass Aged about 43 years Occ; Business R/o 4026/115 Shram Nagar Labbipeta Vijayawada Andhrpu Pradesh 7. S Revathi, W/o Not known to the Petitioner Aged about 30 years Occ Sub Inspector of Police C/o Patamata Police Station Auto Nagar^ Vijayawada. ...Respondents lANO: 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 remand the matter for fresh consideration after giving us an opportunity of being heard till such time 5th and 6th respondents shall be restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession of the Appellants property situated in Plot No 19 & 20, Block - C-12, Jawahar Auto Nagar, Cpp Electric Sub Station other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the and pass such circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioners; SRI J RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 to 7: SRI M R K CHAKRAVARTHY The Court made the following order: ii? APHC010414282025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3483] WRIT APPEAL NO: 893/2025 Writ Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dt.11/07/2025 directing the 4th respondent in W.P.No.16881/2025 not to interfere in civil disputes which was obtained by the 5th and 6th respondents by conceiling the facts and consequently direct the respondents to give protection to the appellant against the actions of 5th and 6th respondents herein till the disposal of Civil Cases before the Civil Courts. Between; 1.SHAIK ASHA LATHA, W/O VANKADARU HARIKRISHNA ABOUT 36 YEARS OCC HOUSEWIFE R/O D NO ~ DHANEKULAVARI VEEDHI, ASHOK NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA. 2.VANKADARU HARIKRISHNA, S/0 AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O D NO 74-24-24/1 DHANEKULAVARI VEEDHI, ASHOK NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA. AGED 74-24-24/1, V SubHASH CHANDRA BOSE ...APPELLANT(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATI. 2.THE COMMISSIONER COMMISSIONERATE VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PATAMATA POLICE STATION AUTO NAGAR VIJAYAWADA. REPRESENTED BY ITS HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT OF POLICE, VIJAYAWADA POLICE .WAMo.893of2025 2 4.THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE,. PATAMATA POLICE STATION AUTO NAGAR VIJAYAWADA. 5.MAHALAKSHMI AUTO VENTURES, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP WITH REGISTRATION NO 287 OF 2011 DATED 30 12 2011 ON THE FILE OF THE REGISTRAR OF FIRMS VIJAYAWADA HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 4026/115 SHRAM NAGAR LABBIPETA VIJAYAWADA ANDHRA PRADESH REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER A SAKUNT MOHAN S/0 MOHANA RAMA DASS AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS OCCBUSINESS R/0 VIJAYAWADAANDHRA PRADESH 6.A SAKUNT MOHAN, S/0 MOHANA RAMA DASS AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS OCC BUSINESS R/0 4026/115 SHRAM NAGAR LABBIPETA VIJAYAWADA ANDHRA PRADESH 7.S REVATHI, W/0 NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS OCC SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE C/0 PATAMATA POLICE STATION AUTO NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA. ...RESPONDENT(S): lA 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 remand the matter for fresh consideration after giving us an opportunity of being heard till such time 5th and 6th respondents shall be restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession of the Appellants property situated in Plot No 19 & 20, Block - C-12, Jawahar Auto Nagar, Opp Electric Sub Station and pass such other order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and pass Counsel for the Appellant(S): 1.J RAVI KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR HOME ^{a^^RCj ‘.W^.9fo.S93of2025 3 2.M R K CHAKRAVARTHY CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI DATE : 16.09.2025 JUDGMENT (Per Sri Justice Ravi Cheemalapati) Challenging the order dated 11.07.2025 passed by a learned single Judge in Writ Petition vide W.P.No. 16881 of 2025, the respondent nos.5 & 6 therein preferred this intra court appeal under clause 15 of Letters Patent. 2. Heard Sri J.Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for appellants, and Sri MRK Chakravarthy, learned counsel for respondent nos. 5 & 6. 3. For convenience, the parties hereinafter will be referred to with their status in the writ petition. 4. The writ petition was filed to declare the action of the respondent police in interfering in civil disputes, alleging that petitioner no.l firm of which petitioner no.2 is Managing Partner, purchased plot nos. 19 & 20 in Jawahar Auto Nagar, Industrial Development Authority, Vijayawada from respondent no.5 under registered sale deeds dated 19.03.2016 and ever since they have been in possession and enjoyment of the same. That thereafter, respondent no.5 filed suit against writ petitioners for injunction and the same was ‘KCO ei ‘RCJ .WJ^Mo.893 of2025 4 compromised before Lok Adalat and accordingly an award dated 16.07.2021 came to be passed, as per which, on payment of Rs. 1,67,50,000/-, respondent no.l shall execute deed reconveying 400 sq.yards to respondent no.5. That respondent nos. 5 and 6 without making payment as per the award, approached the police and consequently the police were coming to the premises and threatening the petitioners to settle the matter with respondent nos.5 and 6 or else they would implicate the petitioners in false cases. 5. Upon considering the pleadings and submissions made by learned counsel, the learned single Judge disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage itself, directing respondent no.4- The Sub Inspector of Police, Patamata Police Station, Auto Nagar, Vijayawada, not to interfere with the civil disputes between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents, apart from leaving it open to the parties to work out their remedies before the appropriate Court as per the Lok Adalat Award. 6. Sri J.Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for appellants, while reiterating the grounds of the appeal would contend that the writ petitioners suppressed and concealed the material facts from being mentioned in the writ petition and filed the writ petition by distorting the facts and misled the Court and the learned single Judge instead of affording an opportunity to the appellants to put forth their contentions, disposed of the writ petition at admission stage '.WJl.9{0.893 of2025 5 itself. He would further contend that the writ petition was preceded by another writ petition vide W.P.No.9119 of 2005 and writ petition filed for police protection vide W.P.No.l883 of 2025, which is pending consideration and also the factum of preferring appeal against the Lok Adalat award, which is pending consideration before this Court and also the factum of passing status quo orders by civil Court and thus the writ petitioners are guilty of suppression of material facts and hence the order of the learned single Judge is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the learned counsel prayed to allow the writ petition and direct respondent police to give protection to the appellants against the actions of writ petitions till disposal of the cases pending before the civil courts. 7. Time and again, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the police lack authority to adjudicate or interfere in civil matters such as property disputes. recovery of money, succession and inheritance issues or land boundary conflicts. That police involvement is limited to maintaining law and order, not resolving or influencing the outcome of civil disputes and the judiciary is the exclusive authority for resolving civil disputes and police overreach is considered a breach of fundamental rights and due process. 8. Through the orders impugned in this Writ Appeal, the learned single Judge had directed the police officials not to interfere with civil disputes %» ^CJ ‘KCJ .WJi.JVo.893 of2025 6 between the writ petitioners and the unofficial respondents. In view of the observations made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in umpteen, the direction given by the learned single Judge to the police directing not to interfere in civil disputes needs no interference. 9. Regarding the relief sought by the appellants for a direction to the police to give protection to them against the actions of writ petitioners is concerned, it is always open to them to take steps in accordance with law before appropriate Forum. 10. In view of the above, this writ appeal being meritless deserves dismissal. 11. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M. RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR Hr SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, 1. One CC to Sri. J Ravi Kumar, Advocate [OPUC]^ 2. One CC to Sri. M R K Chakravarthy, Advocate [OPUC] ^ 3. Two CCs to OP for Home High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUTf^ 4. Two CD Copies gsc HIGH COURT DATED: 16/09/2025 ORDER WA NO. 893 OF 2025 ■8 ^ 23SEP20/5 . Curren'i iisciion m; Co ■k DISMISSING THE WA WITHOUT COSTS