Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 41798 (AP)

AMBATI SAMBASIVA RAO v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/24793/2024 · 2025-12-19

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010480612024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] SATURDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 24793/2024 Between: 1. AMBATI SAMBASIVA RAO, S/O. A.PULLAIAH, AGED 47 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/0.D.N0.6-152/A, MUNAGA BAZAR, DACHEPALLI TOWN AND MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUIIDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, A.P POLICE HEADQUARTERS AT MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALNADU DISTRICT AT NARASARAOPET. 4. THE SUBDIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, GURAZAIA SUB-DIVISION, GURAZALA, PALNADU DISTRICT. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DACHEPALLI POLICE STATION, DACHEPALLI TOWN AND MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. M V SUBBA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: 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 Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in interfering in the civil dispute of the petitioner and frequently calling the 2 petitioner to the 5th Respondent Police Station and compeiling the petitioner to settle his civil disputes, as iilegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequentially direct Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 herein not to interfere and involve in the civil disputes of the petitioner.” 2. Sri M.V.Subba Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that it is a case of interference of Police in civil disputes. 3. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that the matter is related to civil disputes between the Petitioner and one Mallam Peri Reddy and the Police never interfered in the civil disputes between the parties. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, Police are directed not to interfere with 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, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:20.12.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.24793 of 2024 Dt.20.12.2025 Dinesh