APHC010394082024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) SATURDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 20101 OF 2024 Between: 1. D SRIRAMULU REDDY, Age 54 years, s/o. Gopal Reddy, Occ Business, R/o. Flat No.402, Usha Residency, Jeedimetla Village, Suchitra Circle, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, Telangana. ...Petitioner AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh. 2. The Director General of Police, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Manglagiri, Guntur District. 3. The Superintendent of Police, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. 4. The Inspector of Police C I, Rajampet Police Station, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. 5. The SubInspector of Police, Pullampeta Police Station, Annamayya District, Andhra Pradesh. ...Respondents 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 to issue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent Nos.5 and 6 viz., the Inspector of Police, Rajampet Police Station and Sub-Inspector of Police, Pullampet Police Station, Annammayya District in making phone calls to the petitioner from Mobile Nos.91211 00572 (Inspector of Police, Rajampeta Police Station and 91211 00574 (Sub- Inspector of Police, Pullampeta Police Station) and threatening and harassing the petitioner with dire consequences and implication of false criminal cases if the petitioner does not pay the amount of Rs.5 lakhs as demanded in the phone call, as being illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, without jurisdiction and arbitrary exercise of powers and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and issue a consequential direction directing the respondents not to make any phone calls or threat to the petitioner and not to interfere with in any civil matters and pass such 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 to direct the respondent Nos.5 & 6 not to make any threatening calls to the petitioner with regard to the recovery of the alleged amount (though the petitioner does not owe any money to any person) and not to harass and not to summon the petitioner to Rajampeta Police Station or Pullampeta Police Station in this regard, pending disposal of writ petition and pass such Counsel for the Petitioner: G V SRIRAMA MURTY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 20101 OF 2024 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent Nos.5 and 6 viz., the Inspector of Police, Rajampet Police Station and Sub-Inspector of Police, Pullampet Police Station, Annammayya District in making phone calls to the petitioner from Mobile Nos.91211 00572 (Inspector of Police, Rajampeta Police Station and 91211 00574 (Sub-Inspector of Police, Pullampeta Police Station) and threatening and harassing the petitioner with dire consequences and implication of false criminal cases if the petitioner does not pay the amount of Rs.5 lakhs as demanded in the phone call, as being illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, without jurisdiction and arbitrary exercise of powers and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and issue a consequential direction directing the respondents not to make any phone calls or threat to the petitioner and not to interfere with in any civil matters and pass such 2. Heard Sri G.V.SriramaMurty,learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri P.AjayBabu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that it is a case of interference of police in the civil disputes. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that one J.Subbareddy lodged a complaint before the Superintendent of Police, against the petitioner through Public Grievance Redressal System (PGRS) and the same was forwarded to the Station House Officer. The learned Assistant Government Pleader would further submit that police have not registered any case since it is a financial dispute. He would further submit that petitioner was called regarding the said Public Grievance Redressal System complaint only. He would further submit that they are not interfering in the civil dispute between the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Court may pass appropriate Orders. 6. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes except under due process of law. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:20.12.2025 KKV HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 48 WRIT PETITION NO: 20101 OF 2024 Dated.20.12.2025 KKV HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATI MAIN CASE NO:WRIT PETITION NO: 20101 OF 2024 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No. Date ORDER OFFICE NOTE 2. 20.12.2025 Dr.VJP,J The Writ Petition is disposed of. (Vide separate order) ________ Dr.VJP, J KKV