Patibandla Peter Paul v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
WP/46654/2018 · 2025-01-23
B V L N Chakravarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 39665 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 39665 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010963332018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368]
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI
WRIT PETITION NO: 46654/2018
Between:
1. PATIBANDLA PETER PAUL, S/O.LATE KRUPANANDA RAO, CHRISTIAN, AGED. 35 YRS, ASSISTANT MANAGER IN LAKSHMI VILAS BANK, TADEPALLIGUDEM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NELLORE POLICE STATION, NELLORE.
3. PATIBANDLA PUSPALATHA, W/O PETER PAUL, CHRISTIAN, AGED 30 YEARS, OCC. FIELD OFFICER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, BUTCHIREDDYPALEM POST AND MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. MANCHANAPALLI SURYANARAYANA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME (AP)
The Court made the following:
2
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI
WRIT PETITION NO.46654 OF 2018
ORDER:
This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the following relief:
“….to issue Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in calling the petitioner and his family members to the police station and insist to settle the matrimonial dispute with the 3rd Respondent is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondent No.2 not to register any FIR against the petitioner and his family-members in routine manner made by the 3rd Respondent and pass…”
2. Sri Krishna, learned counsel representing Sri Manchanapalli Suryanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the cause in the Writ Petition does not survive for further adjudication, and the Writ Petition has become infructuous.
3. Learned Additional Government Pleader for Home is in attendance.
4. Recording the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
3
As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI
23.01.2025. Pmk
4
29 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI
WRIT PETITION NO:46654 of 2018
Date:23.01.2025 Pmk