APHC010299292024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 15107/2024 Between: 1. MANAM ANJAIAH,, S/O. YALAMANDA, AGE 55 YEARS, R/O. KOTIKALAPUDI VILLAGE, ADDANKI MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BAPATLA DISTRICT, AT BAPATLA. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BAPATLA, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADDANKI POLICE STATION, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 5. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, ADDANKI POLICE STATION, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 6. MORABOINA KONDALU, S/O. LATE YEGAIAH, AGE 40 YEARS, R/O. VENUGOPALAPURAM VILLAGE, ADDANKI MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT. 7. MORABOINA SRINU, S/O. LATE YEGAIAH, AGE 44 YEARS, R/O. VENUGOPALAPURAM VILLAGE, ADDANKI MANDAL, BAPATLA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SIVA NAGARJUNA SIDHADAPU 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: “....to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, especially 4th and 5th respondent herein threatening the petitioner with dire consequences and harassing the petitioner by calling to the police station frequently without any fault of the petitioner highhandedly and further threatening the petitioner that they would implicate in false cases as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, malafide, against to the violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the 4th and 5th respondent not to call the petitioner or his family members to the police station with unconnected issue or interfere with the peaceful and enjoyment of the petitioner or petitioners' family personal life..” 2. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that nothing survives for adjudication in the Writ Petition and the matter has become infructuous. 3. Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. __________________________________ Dr.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 29.12.2025 ASR THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.15107 of 2024 Dt.29.12.2025 ASR