APHC010046802025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO:2711 of 2025 Between: Ramavathi Sirisha ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAMESH BABU NELATURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2 The Court made the following order: Succinctly shorn of all un-necessary facts in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is the specific grievance of the writ petitioner is that she has filed a criminal case against her husband and her in-laws under section 498-A IPC before the Vijayapuri Sourth Police Station and the police registered the case as Crime No.78 of 2022 and the same is pending for filing charge-sheet. Howbeit, the second respondent, without filing a charge sheet against the petitioner's husband and in-laws, is threatening the petitioner to settle the pending cases, or else the petitioner will be falsely implicated in criminal cases. In light of this, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to prevent the police, particularly the 4th respondent/SHO of the Macherla Rural Police Station, from requiring her to appear before them. 2. The learned Assistant Government Pleader has filed written instructions (part of record). 3. As seen from the written instructions, after recording the statement of the witnesses, the Investigating Officer sent a requisition to the SDPO, Gurazala, with a request to delete the alleged accused Ramavat Sarojini, who is the sister-in-law of the petitioner herein. Basing on the orders of the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Gurazala vide C.No.164/Ref/SDPO-GZL/2024, dated 13.12.2024, the IO deleted the name of the alleged accused Ramavat Sarojini and filed the memo before the Hon’ble Junior Civil Judge Court, Macherla on 14.12.2024. Accordingly, after detailed investigation, the Investigating Officer filed charge sheet before the Hon’ble Junior Civil Judge, Macherla vide CFR No.8387/2024 dated 14.12.2024. After filing of the charge sheet before the Hon’ble Civil Judge, the respondent No.4 never called the petitioner to the police station and never harassed the petitioner to withdraw the case. 3 4. As seen from the written instructions, it discerns that the petitioner was never called to the police station to settle the criminal cases in between the petitioner and her husband and in-laws. 5. The court presumes that the present writ petition has been filed due to the deletion of the name of the petitioner’s sister-in-law, Sarajoini, from the array of the accused. The petitioner is at liberty to file an application during the trial, as per law, to add her as an accused with the leave of the court. 6. As per the written instructions placed by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, it is clearly stated that the petitioner was never called to the police station subsequent to filing of charge-sheet. 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to the police not to insist the petitioner to appear before the police station. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date:28.04.2025 Ksj