Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 56587 (AP)

Jonna Harshavardhana Naidu, v. State of Andhra Pradesh,

WP/4628/2021 · 2025-10-13

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010079572021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 4628/2021 Between: JONNA HARSHAVARDHANA NAIDU, S/O. VENKATARAYUDU, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION 86 SARPANCH, R/O.D.NO.12- 75, DEVIREDDYPALLI, H/O. TALAMARLVANDLAPALLI (GRAMPANCHAYAT), NELLACHERUVU MANDAL, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANANTAPURAMU, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADIRI, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NALLACHERUVU POLICE STATION, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. O. MANOHER REDDY 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 4th respondent in calling the petitioner to police station in .respect of Crime No.30/ 2021 even though the petitioner is not an accused as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent not to call the petitioner to the police station.” 2 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that though Crime No.30 of 2021 on the file of Nallacheruvu Police Station, Anantapuramu District for the offences under Sections 188 IPC and Section 34(A) read with 34(1) of A.P.Excise Act, was registered against Accused Nos.1 and 2 initially, subsequently, the name of the Petitioner herein was also added in the said crime. 3. Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. Considering the submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, Police are directed to follow due process of law in connection with the crime registered against the Petitioner. 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:14.10.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.4628 of 2021 Dt.14.10.2025 Dinesh