Thatigotla Vijayalakshmi, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
WP/19303/2021 · 2025-10-07
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 56706 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 56706 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010320702021
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: 19303/2021 Between:
1. THATIGOTLA VIJAYALAKSHMI,, W/O KUNDETI KISHORE KUMAR, D/O. THATIGOTLA RAMANJUL REDDY,AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCC- STUDENT, RIO GUDIYAVANDLA PALLI, H/O GUTTAPALLI VILLAGE, SAMBEPALLE MANDAL, Y.S.R. CUDDAPAH DISTRICT. 2. KUNDETI KISHORE KUMAR,, S/O CHANDRASEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS, RIO GUDIYAVANDALA PALLI VILLAGE, H/O GUTTAPALLE VILLAGE, SAMBEPALLI MANDAL, Y.S.R. CUDDAPAH DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CUDDAPAH DISTRICT, CUDDAPAH TOWN, CUDDAPAH DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RAYACHOTI POLICE STATION, RAYACHOTI, CUDDAPAH DISTRICT. 4. THE SUBDIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, RAYACHOTI SUB DIVISION, RAYACHOTI, CUDDAPAH DISTRICT. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SAMBEPALLE POLICE STATION, SAMBEPALLE, CUDDAPAH DISTRICT. 2
6. THATIGOTLA RAMANJUL REDDY, S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC- POLITICAL LEADER, RIO VARIGA PAPIREDDY GARI PALLI VILLAGE, H/O BANDLA CHERUVU VILLAGE, RAYACHOTI MANDAL, Y.S.R. CUDDAPAH DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. G KONDALA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
3
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19303 of 2021 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 the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd and 4th respondents hunting for us with the direction of the 6th respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violate the right to life of the Petitioners under Article 21 of the Constitution and consequently direct the 3rd and 4th respondents not to hunting for us d direct the 5th respondent to give protection and pass.…”
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.19303 of 2021
Dated.08.10.2025
UPS
59