APHC010171932025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 9228/2025 Between: 1. EPURI ENID JOY, D/O JAMES, 42 YEARS, SC MADIGA,NEAR RCM CHURCH. GOLLAPUDI, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MACHILILPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE SUBDIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, GANNAVARAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PENAMALUR POLICE STATION, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 5. YEDLAPALLI SUBBA RAO, S/O 49YRS. KAMMA, NIDAMANUR,KRISHNA DT 6. JULURI KRISHNA, S/O VEERA RAGHAVAIAH, 61YRS,NIDAMANUR, VIJAYAWADA. 7. VEMULAPALLI VENKATA DURGA, NAGESWARA RAO KAMMA,45 YRS, NIDAMANUR KRISHNA DT.. 8. VANKAYALAPATI VENKATESWARA RAO, NIDAMANUR,KRISHNA 2 DISTRICT 9. DURGA PRASAD, NIDAMANUR,KRISHNA DISTRICT. 10. RAMBABU, NIDAMANUR,KRISHNA DISTRICT 11. KALIDINDI GOPAL RAJU, NIDAMANUR,KRISHNA DISTRICT. A 12. MEDAVARAPU SRI RAMA CHANDRA MURTHY, S/O SUBBA RAO,,56YRS, AKIVEEDU, WEST GODAVARI DT.. 13. JULURI RAGHVENDRA RAO, S/O KRISHNA, 35YRS, NIDAMANUR,KRISHNA DISTRICT. 14. JARABANA ANNA PUMA RANI, 45YRS, GURAJA VILLAGE, MUDINEPALLI MANDAL, KRISHNA DT. 15. TOKALA SAMBASIVA RAO, NIDAMANUR,KRISHNA DISTRICT. 16. KOLLI MOHANA PRASAD, NIDAMANUR,KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GALLA RAMA KOTESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 9228 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: <…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of 4th respondent in not registering the FIR under Sec 340(2), 329,324 (4) (5),338, 74, 3(5) of BNS and Sec 3(1) ( c),(f) (g) (w) of SC and ST (POA) Act 1989 against the respondents No. R5 to R16 and not registering and conducting investigation basing on the police report dated 18.03.2025, 20.3.2025 and registered post dated 28.3.2025 is highly illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and in violation of 173 BNSS and also in violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent to register the FIR under sections 340(2), 329,324 (4) (5),338. 74, 3(5) of BNS and sec 3(1) ( c),(f) (g) (w) of SC and ST (POA) Act. 1989 against the respondents No R5 to R16 and to pass.…= 2. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, would submit that, Police have received the representation of the Petitioner, enquired into the matter and having found that the allegations mentioned in the said complaint are of civil nature, they have not registered the case. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply, would submit that, the representation that the subject matter is civil in nature, is not correct. The allegations mentioned in the complaint given by the petitioner, clearly attract cognizable offence. Learned counsel would finally submit that a direction may be given to the Police to register a case basing on the representation of the petitioner. 4 4. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court while dealing with a matter relating to the availability of alternate efficacious remedy provided under Cr.P.C., instead of writ remedy, in Writ Appeal No.620 of 2024, dated 12.08.2024, held as follows: <16. In Sudhir Bhaskara Rao Tambe v. Hemant Yashwant Dhage and others (supra 4) the Hon’ble Supreme Court at para-3 the end result in case High Court entertains writ petitions of the similar nature now covered under appeal, held as follows: <3. We are of the opinion that if the High Courts entertain such writ petitions, then they will be flooded with such writ petitions and will not be able to do any other work except dealing with such writ petitions. Hence, we have held that the complainant must avail of his alternative remedy to approach the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3) CrPC and if he does so, the Magistrate will ensure, if prima facie he is satisfied, registration of the first information report and also ensure a proper investigation in the matter, and he can also monitor the investigation. ………. <20. The observations and findings in Lalitha Kumari’s case nowhere enunciate a ratio decidendi that the person aggrieved can avail writ remedy bypassing the alternate efficacious remedy provided in CrPC and what was stated therein is that whenever a police officer receives any complaint disclosing commission of a cognizable offence, he shall register FIR without making any preliminary inquiry. Therefore, the said decision cannot come to the rescue of the appellant in the given set of facts. 21. In view of the above, the learned single Judge had rightly dismissed the writ petition holding that the remedy available to the writ petitioner is by availing the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure but not by way of filing writ petition. The order impugned in this writ appeal requires no interference of this Court. The writ appeal lacks merits and deserves dismissal.= 5 5. In the case at hand, as submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, the Police, on receipt of the complaint, after enquiry, having found that the matter is of civil nature, have not registered the crime. In view of the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader and in view of the availability of the alternate efficacious remedy to the Petitioner, as held by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the judgment referred to supra, it is apposite to dispose of the Writ Petition. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to work out her remedies before appropriate forum, in accordance with law. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above observations. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 16.10.2025. UPS 6 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.9228 of 2025 Dated.16.10.2025 UPS 169