APHC010427782025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 22386/2025 Between: 1. MURAPUREDDY LINGAMMA, W/O LATE NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, COOLIE, R/O RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, MOTKULAPALII VILLAGE, SIRIVELLA MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 2. MURAPUREDDY GURREDDY, /O LATE NARAYANA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS. COOLIE, R/O RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, MOTKULAPALII VILLAGE, SIRIVELLA MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SIRIVELLA POLICE STATION, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 4. BURRAREDDIGARI RAMALINGA REDDY, S/O LATE LINGA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, MOTHKULAPALLI VILLAGE, SIRIVELLA MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 5. BURRAREDDIGARI RAMACHANDRA REDDY, S/O RAMA LINGA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O RAMALAYAM VEEDHI, MOTHKULAPALLI VILLAGE, SIRIVELLA MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRIC ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SATYANARAYANA NIMMALA 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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus direct Respondent No.3 not to call the petitioners to the 2 police station even without there being any crime and in coercing and threatening the petitioners to withdraw the civil suit filed against the respondent No.4 and 5 and interfering in civil disputes as abuse of process of law arbitrary illegal unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondent no 3 not to interfere in civil disputes and not to call the petitioners to the Respondent no.3 Sirivella Police Station” 2. Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that, based on the complaint of respondent No. 4, the police called the petitioners to the police station for inquiry. The police advised both parties not to create any law and order problem. It is further submitted that the dispute between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents is of a civil nature, and the police are not interfering in the civil dispute between the parties. 3. For ready reference, the written instructions are extracted hereunder: “It is further submitted that the 3rd respondent called both parties to the Police Station only for counseling purposes. They were advised not to create any law-and-order problems and were directed to approach the competent Revenue Officials or Civil Court for adjudication of their claims.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 5. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents. 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:28.08.2025 Asr 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.22386 of 2025 Dt.28.08.2025 Asr