1 APHC010018322021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 1324/2021 Between: 1. THOTAKURA KRISHNA MURTHY, S/O VENKATARAO, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O GADDALAGUNTAPALEM, ONGOLE TOWN, PRAKASAM ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, STATE OF A.P., MANGALAGIRI. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GUNTUR RANGE, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, , ONGOLE PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ONGOLE I TOWN POLICE STATION, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DISHA WOMAN POLICE STATION, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KAUSHIK KUMBHAJADALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 2 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 1324 of 2021 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the inaction of the respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein in entrusting the investigation into FIR No. 56/2020, 305/2020, 304/2020 along with the complaints and taking departmental action against the 5th respondent and the police constable viz., Venkata Reddy, inspite of the written complaint dt.08-12-2020, followed by personal visits, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 herein to entrust the investigation of the above mentioned cases to the Special Officer and take action on the complaint given by the petitioner and initiate disciplinary action against the 5th respondent and the police Constable Mr. Venkat Reddy in accordance with Law and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Heard Sri Kaushik Kumbhajadala, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the parties have entered into compromise in this matter, the relief has become infructuous regarding the extent of entrusting of the investigation relating to Crime Nos.56/2020, 305/2020 and 304/2020 to Special Officer. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the other relief sought in this writ petition is for taking departmental action against the respondent No.5. He would further submit that let there be a direction to the appropriate authority to take action against the 5th respondent for his unruly behavior. 4 4. As it can be seen from the cause-title of the writ petition, the 5th respondent/Station House Officer of Ongole I Town Police Station is shown in official capacity but not in an individual capacity. This Court cannot direct the Superintendent of Police, Ongole/respondent No.4 to take appropriate departmental action against the respondent No.5 as no opportunity was given to the concerned individual. 5. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of. 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: 07.10.2025. Vns