Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 31519 (AP)

AMATHI APPARAO v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/23880/2025 · 2025-09-10

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

Original Suitbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010454592025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 23880/2025 Between: 1. AMATHI APPARAO, S/O KOTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O PALADUGU VILLAGE, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MEDIKONDURU, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MEDIKONDURU, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEDIKONDURU RURAL POLICE STATION, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. AMATHI RAMARAO, S/O KOTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS, R/O PALADUGU VILLAGE, MEDIKONDURU MANDAL GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. THOKA DEVA DEEPAK ANIRUDH YADAV 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: “.... to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents especially Respondent No.4 in calling the petitioner herein to the police station and interfering with the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and the Respondent No.5 and forcing the petitioner herein to withdraw the civil suit in O.S.No.17 of 2025 and O.S.No.186.2025 on the 2 file of the Honble Principal Junior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli filed against the respondent no.5 is perse illegal, arbitrary, unfair apart from violative of Principles of Natural Justice and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to call the petitioner to the police station without following due procedure established by law and further not to interfere in the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and the respondent no.5.” 2. Heard Sri T.Deva Deepak Anirudh Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that initially a crime has been registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 324(4), 351(2) read with 3(5) of BNS. Police after conducting investigation in the said crime filed charge sheet. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has challenged the same by filing a quash petition and there is a direction to the police to issue notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS. 5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would further submit that, after the filing of the charge sheet, the petitioner continued to interfere in the affairs of the unofficial respondent. As a result, the unofficial respondent lodged another complaint with the police during the pendency of the said case, and pursuant to that complaint, the police called the petitioner to the police station. 3 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that police are regularly calling the petitioner to the police station and insisting him to settle the issue with unofficial respondent and interfering in a civil dispute. 7. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed not to call the petitioner to the police station to settle the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and unofficial respondent. The police are further directed to follow due process of law to secure the presence of the petitioner before them regarding the case which is already registered against the petitioner. 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:11.09.2025 ASR 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.23880 of 2025 Dt.11.09.2025 Asr