APHC010492332024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 25659/2024 Between: S PRAVEEN KUMAR, S/O. S. VENKATA RATHNAM, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O. KURAVAPALLI, JANGAVANDLAPALLI, TIPPIREDDI GARI PALLI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT NOW TIRUPATHI ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT AT RAYACHOTI. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TIRUPATHI, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, BHAKARAPETA POLICE STATION, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. YANAGUNURU SHASHANK 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 declaring the action of the respondents in not taking any action on the petitioners report dated 04-10-2024 as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to take action on the report of the petitioner dated 04-10-2024.” 2. Heard Sri Yanagunuru Shashank, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 2 3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, when they have sent the presentation through registered post to the Police Station, the Police have refused to receive the same. Learned counsel placed the returned register cover before this Court. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that they have not received the representation of the Petitioner. 5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, in reply, would submit that, a case in Crime No.84 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 126(2) and 351(2) of BNS has been registered against the Petitioner. Even prior to that, they have sent a representation to the Police through post dated 26.09.2025 but the Police refused the same. Learned counsel would further submit that, when the Petitioner approached the Police to give a complaint, the Police have not taken the same. As such, Petitioner sent a representation through registered post, which was also refused and on the same day the crime has been registered against the Petitioner. 6. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to place such material before the concerned Police / Respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 is directed to look into postal cover which was refused and take appropriate action according to 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:06.11.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.25659 of 2024 Dt.06.11.2025 Dinesh