Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55465 (AP)

M. Hemalatha v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/18460/2021 · 2025-10-07

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010308972021 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: 18460/2021 Between: 1. M. HEMALATHA, D/O M. GOPALA REDDY W/O P. ASHOK KUMAR, AGED 21 YEARS, R/O DIGUVA NALLAGUTTAPALLI VILLAGE, GUTTAPALLI POST, SOMAVARAM VILLAGE, SAMBEPALLI MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. P. ASHOK KUMAR, S/O LATE RAMANJULU NAIDU, AGED 26 YEARS, OCC. CONTRACTOR, R/O DIGUVA NALLAGUTTA VILLAGE, GUTTAPALLI POST, SOMAVARARN VILLAGE, SAMBEPALLI, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI AT VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAZIPET POLICE STATION, KAZIPET, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 4. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, SAMBEPALLI POLICE STATION, SAMBEPALLI, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2 6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUCHANUR POLICE STATION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 7. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUCHANUR POLICE STATION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 8. M GOPAL REDDY, S/O M. VEERA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC. CULTIVATION, R/O. KOTHA ETURU VILLAGE, KAZIPET MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 18460 of 2021 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution Of India by declaring the action of the respondent No.3, 4, 6 and 7 in colluding with respondent No.8 with the sole purpose of handing the first petitioner to respondent No.8 by ignoring the fact that the first petitioner is major as illegal, arbitrary, without authority, unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.2 and 5 to give protection to the petitioners from respondent No.8 and to pass such.…” 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petition may be disposed of, since the relief has become infructuous in this matter. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents is in attendance. 4. Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 08.10.2025. UPS 4 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.18460 of 2021 Dated.08.10.2025 UPS 62