APHC010508702024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 27067/2024 Between: P SUBBA RAMI REDDY, S/O.RAMA SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS. ADVOCATE, R/O.D.NO.7-4-40, BALAJI STREET, ALLAGADDA TOWN AND MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR RURAL DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 4. THE NANDYAL MUNICIPALITY, REP. BY ITS COMMISSIONER, NANDYAL TOWN AND DISTRICT. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, II TOWN POLICE STATION, NANDYAL TOWN AND DISTRICT. 6. K RAJA REDDY, S/O NAME NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER, CIRCLE INSPECTOR, B KOTHAKOTA URBAN POLICE STATION, ANNAMAIAH DISTRICT. 7. V PRABHAKAR REDDY, S/O NAME NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NANDYAL FRACTION ZONE, NANDYAL TOWN AND DISTRICT. 8. N V RAMANA, S/O NAME NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER, CIRCLE INSPECTOR, PULIVENDULA RURAL POLICE STATION, KADAPA DISTRICT. 9. K VENKATA RAMI REDDY, S/O RAMA SUBBA REDDY, AGE 56 YEARS, R/O. MITNALA VILLAGE, NANDYAL MANDAL AND DISTRICT. 10. CH MANOHAR REDDY, S/O KONDA REDDY, AGE 40 YEARS. OWNER OF BRAKERS PARK, R/O. SANJEEVA NAGAR, NEAR, T.T.D. KALYANA MANDAPAM, NANDYAL TOWN AND DISTRICT. 11. CH SARABA REDDY, S/O KONDA REDDY AGE 40 YEARS, R/O. SBL COLONY, NANDYAL TOWN AND DISTRICT. 2 12. K ASWIN REDDY, S/O VENKATA RAMI REDDY AGE 25 YEARS, R/O. MITNALA VILLAGE, NANDYAL MANDAL AND DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. NARASIMHA RAO GUDISEVA 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 Writ of Mandamus declaring the action, things and deeds of the Respondents Police in not filing the Final Report in pursuance of F.I.R., in Crime No.226//2022 dated 24-08-2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 188, 147, 427, 506 r/w 34 I.P.C., on the file of 11 Town Police Station, Nandyal Town and District further interfering in Civil disputes by harassing the Petitioner at the instance of Respondent No.8 to 12 thereby not taking any action against the Respondent Nos.5 to 8, which is illegal, irregular, unjust, arbitrary, against to the Principles of Natural Justice, contra to the guidelines enumerated in G.O.Ms. No.288, Dated. 05-11-2010 issued by 1st Respondent and in violation of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India, consequently direct the Respondents Police to file the Final Report in pursuance of F.I.R., in Crime No.226/2022 dated 24.08.2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 188, 147, 427, 506 r/w 34 I.P.C., on the file of 11 Town Police Station, Nandyal Town, thereby not to interfere with the Petitioners house site in an extent of Ac.0.06 cents in Sy.No.404, Nunepalli Village, Nandyal Town and District further direct the 4th Respondent to furnish the copy of Survey Report conducted on 18-06- 2022 in an extent of Ac.0.06 cents in Sy.No.404, Nunepalli Village, Nandyal Town and District by taking severe and appropriate action against respondent Nos. 5 to 8.” 2. Sri Narasimha Rao Gudiseva, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that they have lodged a complaint against the unofficial Respondents and the same was registered as a case in Crime No.226 of 2022 on the file of II Town Police Station, Nandyal Town, wherein, the Police could not file final report. Learned counsel would further submit that, during pendency of the 3 investigation in the said case, the Police issued a notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C to the Petitioner to cooperate for the survey. It is submitted that the Police are interfering in the civil disputes between the Petitioner and the unofficial Respondents by constructing him to make construction. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that the investigation is still pending since the Petitioner has not been cooperating to conclude the investigation. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, in reply, would submit that the survey was conducted and the only problem is that the Police are not allowing the Petitioner to make construction in his site. 5. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Police to conclude the investigation and file a report according to law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. Petitioner is directed to cooperate for the investigation. Police are further directed to conduct investigation without interfering in the civil issues between the parties. 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:21.08.2025 Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.27067 of 2024 Dt.21.08.2025 Dinesh