APHC010009482022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 853/2022 Between: 1. DASI MEENA KUMARI, WIFE OF DASI ESWARA RAO, HINDU, SARPANCH, AGED 40 YEARS, R/O.DOOR No.9-61, MAIN ROAD, VALLURU VILLAGE, KAPILESWARAPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRL. SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. KAKINADA. 3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE, RAMACHANDRPAURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANDAPETA RURAL POLICE STATION, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANGARA POLICE STATION, KAPILESWARAPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 6. D BALACHANDRA REDDY, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE, RAMACHANDRPAURAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 7. P.SIVA GANESH, THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANDAPETA RURAL POLICE STATION, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 8. B SAMPATH KUMAR, THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ANGARA POLICE STATIDN, KAPILESWAXAPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 9. THOTA TRIMURTHULU, HINDU, MLC, AGED 55 YEARS, VENKATAPURAM, RAMACHANDRAPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 10. MUTYALA SATISH KUMAR, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, PEDDA VEEDHI, VALLURU VILLAGE, KAPILESWARAPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 11. DEVELLA RUDRAIAH CHOWDARY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, VALLURU VILLAGE, KAPILESWARAPUR MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 12. DEVELLA RAMLINGAIAH CHOWDARY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, VALLURU VILLAGE, KAPILESWARAPURAM MANDAL, EAST 2 GODAVARI DISTRICT. 13. RIMMAPUDI ABBU RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, CHINNA VEEDHI, VALLURU VILLAGE, KAPILESWARAPURAM MANDAL, EAST GODAVARI 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 to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the Respondents and in particular the Respondents 3 to 5 in not registering the complaint of the Petitioner given to the Respondent nos.4 and 5 on 01- 01-2022 for the offences committed by Respondents 9 to 13 and others against the Petitioner for the offence under IPC and also under SC and ST POA Act, but registering a complaint given on her behalf under FIR No.2 of 2022, dt.01-01-2022 acknowledged under Receipt No.3/2022 by the 5th respondent agianst unknown persons, despite her protest that her complaint being genuine agasint Respondents 9 to 13, is nothing but arbitrary, unreasonable, unlawful and against to the Fundamental Rights of the Petitioner under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, by consequently directing the Respondents 3 to 5 to register the complaint of the Petitioner dt.01-01-2022 against the Respondents 9 to 13 and others for the offences under IPC and SC and ST POA Act, by further consequently directing the 2nd Respondent to register a case against Respondents 6 to 8 Under Sec.4 of SC and ST POA Act, 1989, since they have not registered the complaint despite her written complaint dt.01-01-2022 against Respondents 9 to 13, and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2022 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 to pass interim orders of direction directing the Respondents 3 to 5 to consider the complaint of the Petitioner dt.01-01-2022 acknowledged by the 5th Respondent under Receipt No.3/2022 and to proceed under strict provisions of law, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2022 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 to Grant stay of all further proceedings of investigation pursuant to the registering of the case in FIR No.2 of 2022, dt.01-01-2022, by the 5th Respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. P RAJESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the Petitioner seeking the following relief: “....to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the Respondents and in particular the Respondents 3 to 5 in not registering the complaint of the Petitioner given to the Respondent nos.4 and 5 on 01-01-2022 for the offences committed by Respondents 9 to 13 and others against the Petitioner for the offence under IPC and also under SC and ST POA Act, but registering a complaint given on her behalf under FIR No.2 of 2022, dt.01-01-2022 acknowledged under Receipt No.3/2022 by the 5th respondent agianst unknown persons, despite her protest that her complaint being genuine agasint Respondents 9 to 13, is nothing but arbitrary, unreasonable, unlawful and against to the Fundamental Rights of the Petitioner under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, by consequently directing the Respondents 3 to 5 to register the complaint of the Petitioner dt.01-01-2022 against the Respondents 9 to 13 and others for the offences under IPC and SC and ST POA Act, by further consequently directing the 2nd Respondent to register a case against Respondents 6 to 8 Under Sec.4 of SC and ST POA Act, 1989, since they have not registered the complaint despite her written complaint dt.01-01-2022 against Respondents 9 to 13, and pass...” The grievance of the Petitioner is that by keeping aside the statement of the victim, respondent Police have registered a crime against the very same incident basing on the information received from the third party. The said complaint does not reveal the names of the culprits and all the details of the crime. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent State on instructions would submit that respondent Police have registered the subject crime basing on the information received from third party on the very same incident that is why, respondent Police did not register any crime on the complaint given by the Petitioner. 4 Considering the submissions and on a perusal of the material on record, it is clear that in case of cognizable offences, anyone can set the law into motion by giving information to the police but the said information need not disclose the names of the offenders and all the details of the subject crime. The First Information Report is only the information received by the Police first at that relevant point of time. It does not preclude the Police to receive the complaint given by the de facto Complainant as his/her statement and look into such contents of the statement and act according to law. In that view, it is apposite to direct respondent Police to follow due process of law regarding the statement which was given by the Petitioner to the Police on the very same incident. Police are further directed to conclude the investigation and file final report/charge sheet according to law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not filed so far. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 853 of 2022 04.11.2025 Mjl /*