Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55146 (AP)

Mungara Lakshman Sathwick, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/7270/2024 · 2025-11-21

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010126962024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] SATURDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 7270/2024 Between: 1. MUNGARA LAKSHMAN SATHWICK,, S/O BHAGAVAN SANKARA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. DOOR NO. I-9-1, 4TH FLOOR, EKR SQUARE, KAMAYATHOPU, M.G. ROAD, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALNADU DISTRICT, NARASARAOPET, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NARASARAOPET I TOWN POLICE STATION, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. MUNGARA SAKETH RAM PRASAD, S/O SATYA SRINIVASA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. DOOR NO. 8-108/1, ERUKALAPUDI VILLAGE, TENALI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. MUNGARA SATYA SRINIVAS PRASAD SRINU, S/O PRASANNA RAMA LINGESWARA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. DOOR NO. 8-108/1, ERUKALAPUDI VILLAGE, TENALI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6. BUCHIPUDI RAMI REDDY, S/O SUBBA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. RAVIPADU ROAD, SUBBAREDDY GODOWNS, NARASARAOPET TOWN AND MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT 7. BUCHIPUDI KALPANA, W/O RAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. RAVIPADU ROAD, SUBBAREDDY GODOWNS, NARASARAOPET TOWN AND MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2 8. SHAIK MEERABI, W/O BABU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. DOOR NO. 1-7-34, GUJJANAGUNDLA, PATTABHIPURAM, GUNTUR TOWN AND DISTRICT. 9. GOOLI NANDA KUMARI, W/O VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. RENTACHINTALA VILLAGE AND MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 10. SHAIK BABU, S/O ALLABAKSHU, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO. 1-7-34, GUJJANAGUNDLA, PATTABHIPURAM, GUNTUR TOWN AND DISTRICT. 11. SHAIK SADHIKUN, W/O CHINNA KARIMULLA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. DOOR NO.11-17-5, RAMIREDDYPETA, NARASARAOPET TOWN AND MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 12. SHAIK PEER VALI, S/O NABI SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO. 13-10-10/18, ISLAMPETA, NARASARAOPET TOWN AND MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 13. NIMMALA PRASANTH, S/O SAMBASIVA RAO, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O. DOOR NO.28-11-458, 6/21 LANE, BRODIPET, GUNTUR TOWN AND DISTRICT. 14. BOTTU ASHOK KUMAR, S/O BABU RAO, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O. AMBEDKAR NAGAR, AMARAVATHI ROAD, GUNTUR. 15. CHALLA SRINIVASA RAO, S/O ANJANEYULU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC ADVOCATE, R/O. FLAT NO. FF3, TIRUMALA RESIDENCY, 3RD LANE, LAKSHMIPURAM ROAD, GUNTUR. ...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 action of the 2nd and 3rd respondents not register a crime against the 4th to 15th respondents and not investigate the same basing on the petitioner's complaint, dated 24-12-2023, is as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principle of the natural justice and violative of the Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to register a crime against the 4th to 15th respondents basing on the petitioner's complaint, dated 24-12-2023 and investigate the same and file charge sheet as procedure contemplated under section 173(2) of criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KOTHA LEELA GANESH RAGHAVENDRA 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, has been filed, by the Petitioner for the following relief: “ ... to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondents not register a crime against the 4th to 15th respondents and not investigate the same basing on the petitioner's complaint, dated 24-12-2023, is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principle of the natural justice and violative of the Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to register a crime against the 4th to 15th respondents basing on the petitioner's complaint, dated 24-12-2023 and investigate the same and file charge sheet as procedure contemplated under section 173(2) of criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and pass ...” Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home representing for respondent State. Perused the material on record. Learned Assistant Government Pleader placed on record, the written instructions and would submit that respondent Police did not receive any complaint from the Petitioner and requested to dispose of the Writ Petition by passing appropriate orders. In that view, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* Dinesh 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 7270 of 2024 22.11.2025 Mjl /* Dinesh