Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40543 (AP)

BASAM HARIKRISHNA REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/33758/2025 · 2025-12-03

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010647872025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 33758/2025 Between: 1. BASAM HARIKRISHNA REDDY, S/O. LATE VENKAT RAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, MADIREBAILU VILLAGE, BUKKAPATNAM MANDAL, SRI SATYASAI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PUTAPARTI, SRI SATYASAI DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BUKKAPATNAM POLICE STATION, SRI SATYASAI DISTRICT. 4. SAKE THIRUPALU, SO. GANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, MADIREBAILU VILLAGE, BUKKAPATNAM MANDAL, SRI SATYASAI DISTRICT ...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, especially one in die nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 interfering in the civil dispute by threatening to the petitioner to executer the property of the petitioner survey No. 149 an extent of Ac. 1.70 cents situated 2 at Kodiacheruvu, Maderabailu Village, Bukkapatnam Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District, in favour ol 4th respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and21 constitution of India and consequently direct the resiiondents 2 and 3 not to threatening the petitioner to execute the property bearing survey No.149 an extent of Ac.1.70 cents situated at Kothacheruvu, Maderabailu Village, Bukkapatnam Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District. and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 respondents 2 and 3 not to threatening the petitioner to execute the property bearing survey No. 149 an extent of Ac. 1.70 cents situated at Kotliacheruw, Maderabailu Village, Bukkapatnam Mandal, Sri Satya Sai district and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. LINGALA HAZARATHAIAH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 33758 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer: “…to issue a Writ, order or direction, especially one in die nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 interfering in the civil disputes by threatening to the petitioner to executer the property of the petitioner survey No. 149 an extent of Ac. 1.70 cents situated at Kodiacheruvu, Maderabailu Village, Bukkapatnam Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District, in favour of 4th respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Article 14 and 21 constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent Nos.2 and 3 not to threaten the petitioner to execute the property bearing survey No.149 an extent of Ac.1.70 cents situated at Kothacheruvu, Maderabailu Village, Bukkapatnam Mandal, Sri Satya Sai District.…” 2. Heard Sri Lingala Hazarathaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent- police are interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent and threatening the petitioner to settle the matter. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions would submit that basing on the PGRS complaint of the petitioner, the respondent-police have called both the parties to the police station for preliminary enquiry. During the course of enquiry, it came to light that there are civil disputes between the parties. The police have advised both the parties to work out their remedies before the Civil Court. 4 5. Considering the submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedies before the appropriate forum according to law. The police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the parties, except under due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 04.12.2025. UPS 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.33758 of 2025 Dated.04.12.2025 UPS 206