Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 56157 (AP)

GUNDEPUDI VENKATA LAKSHMI ANJANEYA PRASAD v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/19423/2024 · 2025-12-19

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010382462024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] SATURDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19423/2024 Between: 1. GUNDEPUDI VENKATA LAKSHMI ANJANEYA PRASAD, S/O. (LATE) KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC UN-EMPLOYEE, R/O. DOOR NO.5-76, KONDAMODU, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GUNTUR RANGE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALNADU DISTINCT, NARASARAOPET, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RAJUPALEM POLICE STATION, RAJUPALEM, PALNADU DISTRICT. ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6. ALETI SUDHAKAR, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER. AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC PASTOR, PIDUGURALLA TOWN, PIDUGURALLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE 2 GUNTUR DISTRICT. 7. BALINETI ANKAMMA, S/O VEERAIAH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O. VENKTAPPAIAH COLONY, GUNTUR TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 8. YEDLAVALLI SRINIVAS, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. PIDUGURALLA VILLAGE, PIDUGURALLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 9. YEDLAVALLI ANURADHA, W/O SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O. PIDUGURALLA VILLAGE, PIDUGURALLA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. 10. TELAGAPALLI VENKAIAH, S/O RAMAKOTAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC FARMER, R/O. NEMALIPURI VILLAGE, RAJUPALEM MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SANAGA ASHOK KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. BALA DASTAGIRI P 3. SESHAGIRI RAO ULLAM 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19423/2024 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 5th respondent in involving in civil matters and brake open the petitioners house and handed over the same to the 6th to 9th respondents is illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental right guaranteed to the petitioner under Article 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd and 4th respondents to take appropriate departmental action against the 5th respondent for misusing his powers and brake open the petitioner’s house and hand over the same to the 6th to 9th respondents.…” 2. Heard Sri S.Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the official respondents. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that there are civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents. The petitioner sent a representation to the 4th respondent and the same was endorsed to the 5th respondent. Basing on the representation of the petitioner, the 5th respondent called both the parties for preliminary enquiry. After due enquiry, it came to light that the subject matter is civil in nature. Hence, they have not registered any case. He would further submit that the 5th respondent police did not receive any complaint from the petitioner dated 16.08.2024. The 5th respondent never threatened the 4 petitioner to implicate in criminal cases and never interfered in the civil disputes between the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 5. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the parties, except under due process of law. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 20.12.2025. UPS 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19423/2024 Dated.20.12.2025 UPS 170