-V-. ' IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY present PRADESH :: AMARAVATI DAY OF APRIL 4 FIVE !! the honourable SRI JUSTICE WRIT PETITION NO: 10943 OF HARINATH.N Between: Nailu Muneiah, S/o. i Cultivation Late Nailu Munuswamy, Aged about Polireddy Palem 74 Years, Occ- Post, R/o. Doravarisatram Mandal, Tirupati District. Village, Akkarapaka ...PETITIONER AND 1. state ofAndhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Ve,a.apndi, Anraravati 2. Superintendent of Police, 3. Deputy Superintendent of Police 4. Station House Officer, 5. Karllapudi Suresh Babu, S/o. K. Gopal Setty, Aged about DiltricT^'"^*^ Mandal Tirupati District at Tirupati. ’ Naidupet. Tirupati District. Doravarisatram Police Station Tirupati District. 50 Years, Tirupati f 6. Karllapudi Jagadeeswari, W/o. K.Gopal Setty, Aged about 45 Years, Occ- House Wife, R/o. Bapuji Street, Sullurupet Post and Mandal, Tirupati District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents, particularly the 4th respondent at the instance of 5th and 6th respondents in calling the petitioner to police station and insisting the petitioner to sit in police station from morning to evening without register any crime against the petitioner and insisting the petitioner to yield the terms of 5th and 6th respondent in order to settle the civil dispute in between the petitioner with the 5th and 6th respondents pertaining to petitioner agricultural landed property admeasuring with an extent of Ac.4.96 cents covered by survey No. 304-1-A and same was situated at Akkarapaka Village in Doravaristram Mandal of Tirupati District and without there being any authority or sanction of law and declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent not to interfere in any manner with petitioner personal life and liberty. lA 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 may be pleased to direct the respondents, particularly 4 respondent not to insist me to appear before his authority nor interfere in any manner with my peaceful possession and enjoyment over my agricultural land admeasuring with an extent of Ac.4.96 cents covered by th V survey No. 304-1-A and same was situated at Akkarapaka Village in Doravaristram Mandal of Tirupati District, in the interest of Justice, in pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. MUCHAKAYALA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 4: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI SINGARAJU MAHASWETHA VARMA The Court made the following Order: 1 HN, J W,P.No.l0943_2025 APHC010220082025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) H.i'H [3457] / / MONDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH ^ day OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE present the HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE WRilPEIIJION NO: inq4r^/9noi; HARINATH.N Between: Nallu Muneiah, ...PETITIONER AND State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.MUCHAKAYALA NARAYANA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.SINGARAJU MAHASWETHA VARMA 2.GP FOR HOME ...RESPONDENT{S) \ 2 HN, J W.P.No.10943 2025 The Court made the following Order: The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the 4’^ respondent, at the instance of respondent Nos.5 and 6, in repeatedly calling the petitioner to the police Station and 1. threatening the petitioner to settle the civil disputes between the petitioner and the respondent Nos.5 and 6. 2. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the petitioner was called to the police station upon receipt of a complaint from the 6'*^ respondent, and for the purpose of investigation. It is further submitted that after realizing that the disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent Nos.4, 5 and 6 are of a civil nature, the police refrained from proceedings further. 3. Recording the submissions, there shall be a direction to petitioner to approach the appropriate civil Court for redressal of his grievance. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Qrf/. A VENU GOPAL RAO assistant re^trar p/ SECTION OFFICER 4. //TRUE COPY// 1 To, 1. One CC to Sri. Muchakayala Narayana, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for HOME ,High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 3. One CC to Sri Singaraju Mahaswetha Varma, Advocat.[OPUC] 3. Three CD Copies vna \ HIGH COURT DATED:28/04/2025 \ ORDER WP.No.10943 of 2025 CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS