APHC010456822025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 23222/2025 Between: VEGI RAMA, W/O GOVINDA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O D.NO 15-64/1, PRAKASH NAGAR, PENDURTHI MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP, BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETERIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, PENDURTHI POLICE STATION, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PENDURTHI POLICE STATION, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4. KASIREDDY SATYAVATHI, W/O LATE RAMU NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC HOME MAKER R/O D.NO 15-72, PRAKASH NAGAR, PENDURTHI, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 5. KASIMAHANTI SRINIVASA RAO, , S/O MURALI MOHAN RAO AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC RAILWAY EMPLOYEE, R/O D.NO 15-93, PRAKASH NAGAR, PENDURTHI, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 6. KASIMAHANTI VENKATA LAKSHMI, , W/O SRINIVASA RAO AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O D.NO 15-93, PRAKASH NAGAR, PENDURTHI, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SREEMANNARAYANA VATTIKUTI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in summoning, harassing and threatening the petitioner at the behest of private Respondent Nos. 4 to 6, in relation to the subject property situated in Survey No.123/2, Prakash Nagar, Pendurthi, Visakhapatnam District, despite pendency of O.S.No.299 of 2023 before the Court of the learned VII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 not to interfere in any manner with the civil dispute between the petitioner and private respondents.” 2. Sri Sreemannarayana Vattikuti, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that Police are repeatedly calling the Petitioner to the Police Station at the behest of the unofficial Respondents without there being any case registered against her. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, would submit that no crime is registered against the Petitioner and that the Police are not calling the Petitioner to the Police Station. 4. Considering the submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Police not to call the Petitioner to the Police Station, in the absence of any crime registered against her. 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:03.09.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.23222 of 2025 Dt.03.09.2025 Dinesh