APHC010535872024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 28052/2024 Between: 1. KUNA SATHIRAJU,, S/O KUNA VEERA RAGHAVULU, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC- BUSINESS, R/O 52-9-12, MUDIMBBI VARI VEEDHI, KAKINADA TOWN, KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OFANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAKINADA DISTRICT AT KAKINADA. 4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CUM SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, KAKINADA AT KAKINADA 5. THE KAKINADA I TOWN POLICE STATION, REP BY ITS STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KAKINADA. 6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KAKINADA I TOWN CIRCLE, KAKINADA. 7. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, CUM REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KAKINADA DIVISION, KAKINADA. Page 2 of 5 8. SHAIK MADEENA BASHA, S/O ABDULLAH, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCC- RETIRED RTC EMPLOYEE, R/O MEENA TOWERS, MAJESTIC STREET, KAKINADA. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No. 4 to 7 and their staff in interfering with possession of petitioner over shop Sri Durga Annapurna Milk Supply run at D.No. 54-1-3 facing west, opposite Vishnalayam, Jagannaickapur, Kakinada, where business of petitioner, threatening to dispossess him and also pressurizing the petitioner to vacate the same at the behest of 8th respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents No. 4 to 7 and their staff not to interfere with possession of petitioner over the said property, not to pressurize the petitioner to vacate the premises, while directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to initiate departmental action against the 4th, 6th respondents and their staff for such illegal acts and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct the 4 to 7 respondents and their staff not to interfere with life an liberty of the petitioner by calling him to their offices or interfere with possession of petitioner over shop namely ‘Sri Durga Annapurna Milk Supply’ run at D.No. 54-1-3 facing west, opposite Vishnalayam, Jagannaickapur, Kakinada, in any manner like tress pass, dispossession, preventing entry into the land, preventing farming operations etc and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SASANKA BHUVANAGIRI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. GANTA PRASAD The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 28052 of 2024 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No. 4 to 7 and their staff in interfering with possession of petitioner over shop Sri Durga Annapurna Milk Supply run at D.No. 54-1-3 facing west, opposite Vishnalayam, Jagannaickapur, Kakinada, where business of petitioner, threatening to dispossess him and also pressurizing the petitioner to vacate the same at the behest of 8th respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents No. 4 to 7 and their staff not to interfere with possession of petitioner over the said property, not to pressurize the petitioner to vacate the premises, while directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to initiate departmental action against the 4th, 6th respondents and their staff for such illegal acts and pass.…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appeared for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the police are interfering with the petitioner’s possession of the property and calling the petitioner to the police station without there being registration of any crime. Learned counsel would submit that a direction may be given to the police. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions would submit that based on the complaint given by respondent No.8, the petitioner was called to the police station for preliminary enquiry. The police are not interfering in the civil disputes. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 6. Recording the above said submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed not to interfere in the petitioner’s possession of the property, except under due procedure of law. 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: .30.12.2025. TVN HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.28052 of 2024 Dated.30.12.2025 TVN 234