Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 58687 (AP)

SAGANTI MAHESH KUMAR v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/26066/2022 · 2025-11-19

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010424612022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 26066/2022 Between: SAGANTI MAHESH KUMAR, S/O PANDURANGA GOUD, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O D.NO. 28-49 NEAR ZILLA PARISHAD SCHOOL, NEREDMET, MALKAJGIRI, HYDERABAD, ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM URBAN DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DOWLESWASRAM POLICE STATION, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM DISTRICT. 4. SMT MUDDADA REHALAMMA, W/O LATE M,KRISHNA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O DOWLESWARAM VILLAGE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM RURAL MANDAL AND DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V BABY RANI 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 to declare the action of the respondent No. 3 herein in calling me to the police station at the behest of 4th respondent and threatening to handover the petitioner's land in Sy.No. 98/1 admeasuring Ac.3.00 cents situated at Dowleswaram village, Rajamahendravaram Rural Mandal, E.G.District and thereby causing 2 interference in the civil disputes, as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.” 2. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that, based on the complaint given by Respondent No.4, Police called the Petitioner for enquiry, however, no crime is registered against the Petitioner. It is further submitted that the Police are not interfering with the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.. 3. Ms.V.Baby Rani, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, Police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the parties, 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:20.11.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.26066 of 2022 Dt.20.11.2025 Dinesh