APHC010279842021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16495/2021 Between: KONDA SUBHADRA, W/O.KONDA DHARMA REDDY, AGED 55 YEARS, OCC HOUSE HOLD, R/ O. PLOT NO.24, BALAJI COMPLEX, MARUTHI TOWNSHIP, NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NANDIVARGAM POLICE STATION, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 3. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. GOPIREDDY GOPINATHA REDDY, S/O. RAMASUBBA REDDY, R/O. NANDAVARAM VILLAGE, BANAGANAPALLI MANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B SARVOTHAM REDDY 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 to declare the delay and inaction on the part of the respondent No.1 in considering and disposing of the complaint dated 26.07.2021 submitted by the petitioner and consequent complaint received by the 1st respondent from the 2nd respondent on 2.8.2021 with specific endorsement in accordance with section 154 of Cr.P.C. as arbitrary, illegal and consequently direct the respondent No.1 to take action in accordance 2 with section 154 of Cr.P.C. in pursuant to the complaint dated 26.07.2021 made by the petitioner and the consequent complaint forwarded by the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent with specific endorsement forthwith in the interest of justice.” 2. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, would submit that, the Police having received the representation of the Petitioner, enquired into the matter and found that the matter is purely of civil nature and as such, the Respondent – Police has not registered the case based on the said representation. 3. Sri B.Sarvotham Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of giving liberty to the Petitioner to work out her remedies before appropriate forum in accordance with 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:08.10.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.16495 of 2021 Dt.08.10.2025 Dinesh