Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 49187 (AP)

ARE NARMADA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/33641/2023 · 2025-12-09

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010652282023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 33641/2023 Between: 1. ARE NARMADA, W/O.SURENDRA BABU, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O.NEELAYAPALEM, PEDDAGANJAM VILLAGE, CHINNAGANJAM MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT. 2. ARE SURENDRA BABU,, S/O.RAMA RAO, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O.NEELAYAPALEM, PEDDAGANJAM VILLAGE, CHINNAGANJAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 3. PALETI YESU RATNAM,, S/O.RANGA RAO, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O.NEELAYAPALEM, PEDDAGANJAM VILLAGE, CHINNAGANJAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BAPATIA DISTRICT AT BAPATIA. 3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, INKOLLU CIRCLE, INKOLLU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT. 4. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHINNAGANJAM POLICE STATION, CHINNAGANJAM VILIAGE AND MANDAL, BAPATIA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. NAGA PRAVEEN VANKAYALAPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in threatening through mobile numbers 9121102149 and 9121102147 thereby calling to the 4th respondent police station, without there being any reason, as illegal, irregular, 2 irrational, without any authority of law and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 not to interfere in any manner into the petitioners civil dispute at the instance of the 3rd parties” 2. Heard Sri Naga Praveen Vankayalapati, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that on the complaint made by a private party, the petitioner was called to the police station and enquired into the issue and it is found that the subject matter is purely civil in nature, and no crime has been registered against the petitioner. Except that, police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the parties. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, 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, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:10.12.2025 Asr 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.33641 of 2023 Dt.10.12.2025 Asr