APHC010901592018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 43562/2018 Between: 1. SRI VIDYA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICER AT DOOR NO.20-24, I ST LANE, SARADA NAGAR, NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE, BALIGATTAM, NARSIPATNAM MUNICIPALITY, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SMT. G. SATYAVATHI. 2. SMT. GADI SATYAVATHI, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O G.SESHAGIRI RAO, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.1-243A, SARADA NAGAR, NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE, BALIGATTAM, NARSIPATNAM MUNICIPALITY, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. SRI.GADI SESHAGIRI RAO, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O SRI APPALA NAIDU, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.1-243A, SARADA NAGAR, NEAR HEAD POST OFFICE, BALIGATTAM, NARSIPATNAM MUNICIPALITY, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4. BOLEM APPANA DORA, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O ATCHIYYA, SARADANAGAR, BALIGATTAM, NARSIPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HOME DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NARSIPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NARSIPATNAM TOWN POLICE STATION, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. S.V.S.S.SIVA RAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 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 the 3rd Respondent in interfering with the affairs of the 1st petitioner society and issuing notices to the petitioners 2 to 4 under Section 91 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 demanding to furnish information pertaining to the affairs and management of the 1st petitioner society as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction besides violating Petitioners rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of India.” 2. Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that, after completion of investigation, the case against the Petitioners was referred as “Insufficient Evidence” and hence, no further orders are required in this matter and the petition may be disposed of. 3. For ready reference, the written instructions are extracted hereunder: “After completing the investigation, the then Inspector of Police sought the opinion of the Additional Public Prosecutor, Assistant Sessions Judge Court, Narsipatnam. The Additional Public Prosecutor reviewed the investigation and concluded that the case was baseless. Subsequently, a request to refer the case as "Insufficient Evidence" was sent to the SDPO, Narsipatnam, and granted permission vide C.No:93/C-4/SDPO-NPM/2023 dated 16.03.2023.” 4. Sri S.V.S.S.Siva Ram, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit, recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 5. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. 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:21.07.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.43562 of 2018 Dt.21.07.2025 Dinesh