Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 57560 (AP)

D.Ushasri v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/13225/2021 · 2025-10-08

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010225162021 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. 13225/2021 Between: 1. D.USHASRI, D/O D.GOPI, AGED ABOUT 13YEARS 2. D.VAMSHI, S/O D.GOPI AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, ALL THE PETITIONERS ARE MINORS AND REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN BY NAME D.SOWJANYA W/O D.GOPI R/O BALIJAPALLI VILLAGE, KALAVAKUNTA POST ENUVURU MANDAL CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR,CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PENUMURU POLICE STATION, PENUMURU MANDAL,CHITTOOR DIST. 5. P PARANDHAMA REDDY, S/O P.MUNI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 50YEARS, R/O S.RAMAPURAM VILLAGE, KALAVAKUNTA POST PENUMURU MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 6. P RAGHUNADHA REDDY, S/O P.BUCHI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 56YEARS, R/O RAMAPURAM VILLAGE, KALAVAKUNTA POST PENUMURU MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. P NARASIMHULU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. K V S VISHNURAM 3. N RANGA REDDY 2 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 police in interfering in civil disputes between the petitioner and unofficial respondents i.e., 5 and 6 herein as illegal arbitrary and violations of article 14, 21 and 300(A) of constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent police not to interfere in Civil disputes.” 2. Sri P.Narasimhulu, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that a direction may be given to the Police not to interfere with the civil disputes between the Petitioner and the unofficial Respondents. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, would submit that the Police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos.5 and 6. 4. In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos.5 and 6. 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.13225 of 2021 Dt.09.10.2025 Dinesh