/ Sr APHC010594232024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 31215 OF 2024 Between: ShrustuYasaswini, D/o. Raghu Ramaiah practitioner Aged 31 years,Occ Legal H.No. 80/134 A-5, Kurnool Town, R/o. Venkatadri Nagar, Kurnool District, Andhra Pradesh- 518002 ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep by its Principal Secretary Home Department Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,GunturDistrict 2. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Range Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh 3. Superintendent Of Police, Kranthi Nagar , Old DSP Office, Near 3 town Police Station Nandyal District Andhra Pradesh-518501. 4. Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Allagadda Nandyal District Andhra Pradesh 518543 5. Circle Inspector, Allagadda Rural Police Station, Pradesh 518543 6. Station House Officer, Allagadda Rural Police Station Allagadda District, Andhra Pradesh-518543 NandyalDist, Andhra Nandyal 7. Seshadri Rajagopalan, ,S/o Rajagopalan, R/o. B4 NO Q.Sriiakshmi Flats 26 Street Nanganallur,Chennai - 600061 Presently at c/o. Sri Ahobila Mutt 8- A Aarthi Nagar, East Tambaram .Selayiur, Chennai- 600059. 8. R Neelamegham, Chairman of Ahobila Mutt (Andhra Pradesh and Telangana) C/o. Sri Ahobila Mutt 2-2-20/B,BaghAmberpet Durga Bai Deshmukh Colony,mC- Lane,Hyderabad-500013. 9. A Madhavan, ,Occ Manager in Sri Sannidhi R/o. 5/3, Sarvamangala Housing Colony , Aarthy Nagar Street ,KamarajarSalai , Tambaram, Kancheepuram, Tamilnadu 600059. ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, one more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of Respondent No. 6 in not considering and registering complaint against the Respondent Nos. 7 to 9 for acts of sexual harassment and repeated threats to the petitioner^ life illegal, arbitrary and unjust, thereby violating the petitioners fundamental rights under the Constitution of India and relevant enactments and also defeating the purpose of the ratio laid down in Vishaka and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1997 SCC 3011 and the provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 and consequently direct Respondent No. 6 to register the complaint against RespondentNos. 7 to 9. as lA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 direct the Respondent No. 6 to consider the complaint of the Petitioner and register an FIR pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SRINIVAS BOBBILI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.7 to 9: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following order: .r APHC010594232024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] FRIDAYJHE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N WRIT PETITION NO: 31215/2024 Between; 1.SHRUSTUYASASWINI,, D/0. RAGHU RAMAIAH AGED 31 YEARS,OCC LEGAL PRACTITIONER R/0. VENKATADRI NAGAR, H.NO. 80/134 A-5, KURNOOL TOWN, KURNOOL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH- 518002 ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS,VELAGAPUDI,GUNTURDISTRICT 2.DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, RANGE KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH 3.SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KRANTHI NAGAR , OLD DSP OFFICE, NEAR 3 TOWN POLICE STATION NANDYAL DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH-518501. 4. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALLAGADDA NANDYAL DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH 518543 5.CIRCLE INSPECTOR, ALLAGADDA RURAL POLICE STATION, NANDYALDIST, ANDHRA PRADESH 518543 6.STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ALLAGADDA RURAL POLICE STATION ALLAGADDA , NANDYAL DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-518543 7.SESHADRI RAJAGOPALAN, ,S/0 RAJAGOPALAN, R/0. B4 NO 9,SRILAKSHMI FLATS 26 STREET NANGANALLUR,CHENNAI - 600061 PRESENTLY AT C/O. SRI AHOBILA MUTT 8-A AARTHI NAGAR , EAST TAMBARAM ,SELAYIUR, CHENNAI- 600059. 8.R NEELAMEGHAM, CHAIRMAN OF AHOBILA MUTT (ANDHRA PRADESH AND TELANGANA) C/O. SRI AHOBILA MUTT 2-2- 20/B,BAGHAMBERPET DURGA BAI DESHMUKH COLONY,MC- LANE,HYDERABAD-500013. II2II WP.No.31215 of 2024 9.A MADHAVAN, ,0CC MANAGER IN SRI SARVAMANGALA HOUSING COLONY STREET .KAMARAJARSALAI KANCHEEPURAM, TAMILNADU 600059. SANNIDHI R/0. 5/3, AARTHY NAGAR TAMBARAM, ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that n he circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith tL^Hiqh Court may be pleased to may be pleased issue a Writ’ order ^ direction, one more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of Respondent No. 6 in not considerino Tnd registering complaint against the Respondent Nos 7 to ffo acts of sexual harassment and repeated threats to the petifeners l^f Illegal, arbitrary and unjust, thereby violating^ the petitioneTs fundamental rights under the Constitution of India and re evam “and ishaka and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1997 SCC 3011 "o™ provisions of the Sexual Harassment of Women (^Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 and direct Respondent No. 6 to register the Nos. 7 to 9 and pass such or as in and the at Workplace consequently complaint against Respondent lA NO: 1 OF 7noA statedTlLTI^Lif^fi?" praying that in the circumstances t": Zp^Sn of Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SRINIVAS BOBBILI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: WP.No.31215of 2024 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH. N WRIT PETITION No.31215 of 2024 ORDER: 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on part of respondent No.6 in considering and registering the complaint filed by her against respondents Nos.7 to 9 for acts of sexual harassment and repeated threats to the petitioner's life. 2. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as the Legal Manager in Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Swami Devastanam, Ahobilam and that she was entrusted with the duty of assisting the Director in all the legal matters connected with land administration of the Devastanam. 3. The petitioner was subsequently transferred from the Devastanam to Matham by 8‘^respondent who is the chairman of Ahobila Matham. 4. It is submitted that such action was in collusion with /‘'^respondent and that it is alleged that the petitioner was escalating the instances of sexual harassment by the /‘'^respondent. In this regard, the petitioner is said to have been physically and mentally harassed by the /‘'^respondent. It is further submitted that the petitioner had escalated the misdeeds of /‘'^respondent to the higher authorities of the mutt. It is also WP.No.31215 of 2024 alleged in the petition that abusive assassinating the character of the petitioner posting in the Facebook were also made. 5. It is submitted that the petitioner submitted the 6"'respondeht on 17.09.2024. It a representation to is admitted that though a complaint was filed by the petitioner, the 6>^espondent did register any case and also did not or not give any acknowledgment for the complaint submitted against the 7‘^espondent. that the petitioner has also It is submitted received threatening calls from various numbers allegedly warning the petitioner with the complaint against respondent Nos.7to not to proceed 9. It is submitted that the petitioner also submitted on 17.11.2024 and O’^'^respondent. A further 03.12.2024 was made to 2"'^respondent. a complaint to 2"drespondent representation dated However, there was no progress in registering the complaint. 6. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is the bounden statutory duty of the police to register a complaint soon after receipt of a complaint from a woman alleging offences against the woman. Ideally the police ought to out investigation. have registered a zero FIR and carried Learned Senior counsel further submits that the police ought to a proactive action in crimes against woman. have taken However, the inaction on the part of the respondent police i ignoring the complaint of the petitioner speaks in volumes of the WP.No.31215of2024 manner in which the police have shown their insensitivity towards the complaint filed by the petitioner. 7. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the State submits that a detailed counter is filed and the written instructions as received from the concerned Officer are also placed on record. It is submitted that the petitioner did not submit any written complaint to the 6^'^ respondent and that the petitioner had submitted a complaint to the 2"'^respondent. 8. The said complaint was endorsed to the 4**^ respondent for enquiry and that on instructions of the 4''^respondent, the petitioner was also called to the police station on 24.09.2024 and the respondents 5 and 6 had contacted the respondents 7 to 9 phone in presence of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner herself had submitted a written statement by over the enquiry on her over expressing her satisfaction representation dated 25.11.2024 and 03.12.2024. 9. The counter filed by the 6‘^respondent is referred to by the learned Government Pleader during the course of her arguments and submits that in so far as the complaint relating to the alleged social media postings against the petitioner, the contents of the complaint would amount to offences under Section 66A of the IT Act and those offences were struck down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Shreya Singhal Vs. Union of UGH WP.No.31215of 2024 India^ and that the 6*''respondent has also obtained legal opinion from the Assistant Public Prosecutor. The alleged offences punishable under Section 66-A of the are Information Technology 499 of IPC. A private the petitioner is amounted to offences Act and Section 500 read with Section complaint ought to be filed by the petitioner if so aggrieved with the said postings which under Section 499. 10.lt is also submitted i - in the counter that the complaint has copy of the complaint along with the filed a annexures to the writ petition dated 22.04.2024. In the said complaint also there are no respondents. The respondent repeated allegations of the alleged in the social media, were verified by the 6*^ respondent and allegations against the other has further submitted that the derogatory, abusive and defamatory postings particularly the Facebook that he could not find petitioner. The petitioner has filed any such abusive postings against the a complaint dated 17.09.2024 petitioner and is now made a maintain the writ petition. The submits that the police have as mandated under Section 2023 (for short a false complaint is lodged which evidently is unsigned by the part of the pleadings only to Learned Government Pleader also completed preliminary enquiry 173(3) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, BNSS) and have ascertained that against the respondents. (2015) 5 see 1 WP.No.31215 of 2024 inii Pleader for the State relied on Government of Andhra 11. The learned Government Chegireddy Venkata Reddy Vs Pradesh, rep.by its Principal Secretary^ this Court held at 34 reads as follows para 34. Similarly, in AlquePedamsee and others v. ^ and Others the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India held as petitions are finally disposed of with the following directions:- ■K -'iri, iM nerson is annrieved bv the inaction of the policy i-ttr^T tbe modalities contained 1 ^Sartion 190 read With Section 200 of the Code are to " police T«icials to ^Hr'n.fhe remedy in terms of Mre aforesaid provisions^ far as non-orant of sanction aspoct is _ Government concerned to deal with the prayer concerned would do well to deal with the matter months from the date of receipt of this order, have not expressed any opinion on is concerned, it is for . The the Government within three i •We make it clear that we the merits of the case.” 12. (Emphasis supplied) would make it clear that the writ did not register the FIR and •A reading of this judgment was filed because the police hence directions were sought. 13.Heard the learned senior learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to and the counsel for the petitioner 6. Perused the material on record that the police have not acted done on her 14.The grievance of the petitioner her complaint and that no investigation was unfounded as seen from the record. The material on upon complaint is 2 2020 see Online AP 562 WP.No.31215 012024 record reflects that the police have conducted preliminary enquiry as per Section 173(3) of BNSS. 15.The investigating officer has categorically stated that they have conducted preliminary enquiry after the complaint was forwarded by the respondent No.4 and they found no evidence for the allegations alleged in the complaint. 16.In such circumstances, the petitioner would have to invoke the appropriate provisions of BNSS and take necessary steps before a competent Court. In so far as the prayer of the petitioner is concerned to declare the inaction on part of the respondent No.6 in registering a complaint against the respondents 7 to 9 is concerned the issue has been adequately addressed by the 6*^ respondent and the same is evident from the counter and the written instructions produced before the Court. 17.On these considerations, this Court is not inclined to interfere leaving it open to the petitioner to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 18.Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stands closed. Sd/- N. NAGAWIMA ASSISTANT REGI^RAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Department Secretariat 1. The Principal Secretary Home Buiidings,Velagapudi,GunturDistrict 2. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Range Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh 3. Superintendent Of Police, Kranthi Nagar , Old DSP Office, Near 3 town Police Station Nandyal District Andhra Pradesh-518501. 4. Deputy Superintendent Of Police, Allagadda Nandyal District Andhra Pradesh 518543 5. Circle Inspector, Allagadda Rural Police Station, NandyalDist, Andhra Pradesh 518543 6. Station House Officer, Allagadda Rural Police Station Allagadda , Nandyal District, Andhra Pradesh-518543 7. Seshadri Rajagopalan, ,S/o Rajagopalan, R/o. B4 NO 9,Srilakshini Flats 26 Street Nanganallur,Chennai - 600061 Presently at c/o. Sn Ahobila Mutt 8-A Aarthi Nagar, East Tambaram ,Selayiur, Chennai- 600059. 8. R Neelamegham, Chairman of Ahobila Mutt (Andhra Pradesh and Telangana) C/o. Sri Ahobila Mutt 2-2-20/B,BaghAmberpet Durga Bai Deshmukh Colony,mC- Lane,Hyderabad-500013. 9. A Madhavan, ,Occ Manager in Sri Sannidhi R/o. 5/3, Sarvamangala Housing Colony,Aarthy Nagar Street ,Kamarajar Salai, Tambaram, Kancheepuram, Tamilnadu 600059. 10.One CC to Sri. Srinivas Bobbili Advocate [OPUC] 11 .Two CCs to GP For Home High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 12.Two CD Copies. AL HIGH COURT DATED:04/07/2025 ORDER WPNO. 31215 OF 2024 I 9 JUL 2025 SectjQnXW ''€£sauja^ ov DISMISSING THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS