Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 57172 (AP)

Majji Sampathi Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/18502/2021 · 2025-10-08

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010310862021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 18502/2021 Between: MAJJI SAMPATHI RAO, S/O. LATE SRIRAMULU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC . AGRICULTURIST, R/O. D.NO.5-9, NAIDUKAPU VEEDHI, CHAPARA VILLAGE, MELIAPUTTI MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMAVARATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY 2. THE SUPERINTEDNET OF POLICE, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 3. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, MELIAPUTTI POLICE STATION, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. MAJJI BHAGAVATHI, W/O.LATE HARI KRISHNA, AGED ABOUT YEARS, R/O. NAIDUKAPU VEEDHI, CHAPARA VILLAGE, MELIAPUTTI MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT 5. TANGUDU RAMESH, S/O,KRISHNA RAO, AGED ABOUT 5LYEARS, R/O.CHAPARA VILLAGE AND POST, MELIAPUTTI MANDAL, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C SUBODH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. A RAVI SHANKAR The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: 2 “.... a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in interfering in the civil disputes between the respondents 4 and 5 by pressurizing the petitioner to settle the civil disputes and to withdraw the civil suit 0.S.No.145/ 2019 on the file of Senior Civil Judge Court, Tekkali as illegal, arbitrary and one without jurisdiction and violation of Art-21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to not to interfere in the civil disputes between the petitioner and the respondents 4 and 5.” 2. None represented for the Petitioner. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, would submit that the Police are not interfering with the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos.4 and 5. 4. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, Police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos.4 and 5, except under due process of law. 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:09.10.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.18502 of 2021 Dt.09.10.2025 Dinesh