APHC010628402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 32576/2025 Between: GANGIREKULA VENKATA RAO, , S/O. SUBBARAYUDU, AGE 55 YEARS, R/O. YERRAGUDIPADU VILLAGE, CHIMAKURTHI MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, VIJAYAWADA-GUNTUR HIGHWAY, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER SHO, CHIMAKURTHI POLICE STATION, CHIMAKURTHI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. SRI DASARI PRASAD, CIRCLE INSPECTOR, CHIMAKURTHI POLICE STATION, CHIMAKURTHI, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ANUP KOUSHIK KARAVADI 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 actions of the Respondents-Police Authorities in interfering with the petitioner's agricultural land, boundary disputes, and cultivation operations as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and wholly without jurisdiction Consequently, direct the Respondents, not to interfere in any manner with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of his agricultural land 2 in Sy.No.64/3 of Yerragudipadu Village, including the ongoing cultivation of paddy, and not to summon, threaten, harass, or coerce the petitioner in relation to any civil or boundary dispute.” 2. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that, on receipt of complaint from one Oguri Burreiah, the Petitioner was called to the Police Station for preliminary enquiry, however, no crime has been registered against the Petitioner. Since the contents of the said complaint disclose civil disputes, Police advised said Burreiah to approach the civil court. It is further submitted that the Police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the parties. 3. Sri Anup Koushik Karavadi, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 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:03.12.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.32576 of 2025 Dt.03.12.2025 Dinesh