Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 52039 (AP)

KANDIKATLA PRAMEELA v. THE GOVERNMENT OF AP

WP/23964/2024 · 2025-11-24

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010464652024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 23964/2024 Between: 1. KANDIKATLA PRAMEELA, W/O LATE VENKATA NANI, AGED 30 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE. RESIDENT OF WARD NO. 18, PALAKOLLU MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BHIMAVARAM, W.G. DISTRICT. 3. DY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NARASAPURAM, W. G. DISTRICT. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALAKOLLU RURAL POLICE STATION, PODURU, W.G. DISTRICT. 5. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PODURU POLICE STATION, PODURU, W.G. DISTRICT. 6. KANDIKATIA VENKATA RAMANA, W/O NAGABHUSHANAM, AGED 50 YEARS. HOUSE WIFE, RESIDENT OF SABBEVARIPETA, PODURU MANDAL, W.G. DISTRICT. 7. SABBE VENU, FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER. AGED 54 YEARS. BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF SABBEVARIPETA, PODURU MANDAL, W.G. DISTRICT. 2 8. SABBE KUMARI, W/O VENU, AGED 50 YEARS. HOUSE WIFE, RESIDENT OF SABBEVARIPETA, PODURU MANDAL, W.G. DISTRICT. 9. SABBE VARAPRASAD, S/O VENU, AGED 28 YEARS. BUSINESS, RESIDENT OF SABBEVARIPETA, PODURU MANDAL, W.G. DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 tomay be pleased more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents 2 to 5 especially respondent No.4 and 5 in not registering the FIR against the respondents 6 to 9 on the complaint dt.4.10.2024 given by the petitioner as, illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and also violation of principles of natural justice and also violation of Article 14, 19 and Art. 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4 and 5 respondents to register the FIR basing on the complaint of the petitioner dt.4.10.2024 and take appropriate action against the respondents 6 to 9 in accordance with law and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 direct the 4 and 5 respondents to register the FIR basing on the complaint of the petitioner dt 4.10.2024 and take appropriate action against the respondents 6 to 9 in accordance with law pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GOWRI SANKAR CHEEKATLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 23964 of 2024 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 especially respondent Nos.4 and 5 in not registering the FIR against the respondents 6 to 9 on the complaint dt.04.10.2024 given by the petitioner as, illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and also violation of principles of natural justice and also violation of Article 14, 19 and Art. 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4 and 5 respondents to register the FIR basing on the complaint of the petitioner dt.04.10.2024 and take appropriate action against the respondent Nos. 6 to 9 in accordance with law and to pass.…” 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of, since the relief has become infructuous in this matter. 3. Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents is in attendance. 4. Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. 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: 25.11.2025. UPS 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.23964 of 2024 Dated.25.11.2025 UPS 117