Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 39537 (AP)

K. Maheswar Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/44980/2018 · 2025-07-23

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010930182018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 44980/2018 Between: 1. K. MAHESWAR REDDY, S/O.VENKATRAMANA REDDY, AGED 36 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O.EGUVA KOTHA PALLI VILLAGE, MELLACHERUVU POST, PILER MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, THULIUM MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MADANAPALLE SUB DIVISION, MADANAPALLE TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PILER POLICE STATION, PILER TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P. 4. SRI M MAHENDRA NAIK, S/O. RAMULA NAIK, AGED 33 YEARS, OCC. PHD., STUDENT, SV UNIVERSITY, R/O THURPUPALLI VILLAGE, USTHIKAYALAPENTA POST, YERRAVARIPALEM MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, A.P ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 more fully one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not initiating investigation pursuant to the Complaint dated 10.03.2018 of the petitioner against the 4th respondent as biased, illegal, void and capricious and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to register the crime against the 4th respondent by taking into consideration of the petitioners Complaint dated 10-03-2018 and investigate the same in accordance with law to protect life of the petitioner and sexual abuse towards his wife to secure the ends of justice and pass 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GADE VENKATESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. SURESH KUMAR REDDY KALAVA The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “ .... to issue a Writ, order or direction more fully one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not initiating investigation pursuant to the Complaint dated 10-03-2018 of the petitioner against the 4th respondent as biased, illegal, void and capricious and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to register the crime against the 4th respondent by taking into consideration of the petitioners Complaint dated 10.03.2018 and investigate the same in accordance with law to protect life of the petitioner and sexual abuse towards his wife to secure the ends of justice and pass ...” 2. None represented for the Petitioner. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Police on instructions would submit that the respondent Police have not received any Complaint dated 10.03.2018 from the Petitioner as alleged by him and that this Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. In that view, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 44980 of 2018 24.07.2025 Mjl /*