Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 6440 (AP)

Yenikapati Hanumantha Rao v. The State ofAndhra pradesh

WP/3880/2021 · 2025-09-16

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010060332021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 3880/2021 Between: 1. YENIKAPATI HANUMANTHA RAO, S/O. CHINA PERAIAHAGED 65 YEARS. OCC CULTIVATION, 2. JAGARLAMUDI PAVAN KUMAR, S/O. SUBBA RAO, AGED 28 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF TURPU TAKKELLAPADU VILLAGE, J. PANGULURU MANDAL. PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OFANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPANMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI. AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, A.P. POLICE HEAD EUARTERS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, A.P. POLICE HEAD EUARTERS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE. 5. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 6. THE LNSPECTOR OF POLICE, INKOLLU CIRCLE, INKOLLU, PRAKASAM DISHICT. 2 7. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RENINGAVARAM POLICE STATION, J. PANGULURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 8. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND MAGISTRARTE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE 9. THE SUBDIVISIONAL MAGISTRATECUMSUBCOLLECTOR, ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 10. THE MANDAL EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATECUMTAHSILDAR, J. PANGULURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 11. YENIKAPATI HANUMANTHA RAO, S/O. RAMAIAH, AGED MAJOR, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O. PAMIDIPADU VILLAGE, KORISAPADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 12. YENIKAPATI RAMAIAH, S/O SESHAIAH OCC .CULTIVATION R/O.PAMIDIPADU VILLAGE, KLORISAPADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 13. YENIKAPATI GANGADHARA RAO, S/O HANUMANTHA RAO OCC. CULTIVATION PAMIDIPADU VILLAGE, KORASAPADU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT' 14. KUNAMANENI VEERANJANEYULU, S/O AKKAIAH AGED MAIOR, OCC CULTIVATION R/O.THULLURU TAKELLAPADU VILLAGE, J.PANGULURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 15. YENIKAPATI KANTHAIAH, S/O./ VENKATA SUBBAIAH OCC CULTIVATION R/O.THULLURU TAKELLAPADU VILLAGE, J.PANGULURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT 16. RAYANI KESAVA RAO, S/.RAGHAVULU, AGED MAJOR OCC.CULTIVATION, R/O.CHANDULURU VILLAGE, J.PANGULURU MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...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 toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction on the part of respondents particularly respondents 9 and 10 on petitioners' representation dated 20.12.2020 submitted for initiating Proceedings under Chapter VIII and also Chapter X (C) and (D) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the 3 respondents 11 to 16 for their repeated illegal acts, thereby causing breach of peace and disturbance to public tranquility at petitioners agricultural landed properties of Ac.0.52 Cents out of Ac. 2.72 Cents in Survey No.175 and Ac.1.20 Cents in Survey No. 176 situated in Alavalapadu Village of J. Panguluru Mandal in Prakasam District, as illegal, irregular, irrational and amounts to non discharge of legal obligation conferred on respondents 2 to 10 under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 10, particularly, respondents 9 and 10 to initiate proceedings under Chapter-VIII and also Chapter X (C) and (D), Section 107 and 145 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against respondents 11 to 16 and their henchmen and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 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 to direct the respondents 2 to 10, particularly respondents 9 and 10 to consider and initiate necessary action on petitioners' representation dated 20.12.2020, submitted for initiating proceedings under Chapter-VIII and also Chapter X (C) & (D), Section 107 & 145 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the respondents 11 to 16 and their henchmen for causing breach of peace and disturbance to public tranquility at our agricultural landed properties of Ac.0.52 Cents out of Ac. 2.72 Cents in Survey No.175 and Ac.1.20 Cents in Survey No. 176 situated in Alavalapadu Village of J. Panguluru Mandal in Prakasam District, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. UYYURI MANIVARUN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE 3. P A SESHU 4. VENKATA SUBBAIAH POGULA 4 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 WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the inaction on the part of respondents particularly respondents 9 and 10 on petitioner’s representation dated 20.12.2020 submitted for initiating Proceedings under Chapter VIII and also Chapter X (C) and (D) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the respondents 11 to 16 for their repeated illegal acts, thereby causing breach of peace and disturbance to public tranquillity at petitioners’ agricultural landed properties of Ac.0.52 Cents out of Ac.2.72 Cents in Survey No.175 and Ac.1.20 Cents in Survey No.176 situated in Alavalapadu Village of J.Panguluru Mandal in Prakasam District, as illegal, irregular irrational and amounts to non discharge of legal obligation conferred on respondents 2 to 10 under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and offends Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 10, particularly, respondents 9 and 10 to initiate proceedings under Chapter-VIII and also Chapter X (C) and (D), Section 107 and 145 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against respondents 11 to 16 and their henchmen and to pass....” 2. None represented for the petitioners. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader is in attendance. 4. As the petitioner are not evincing any interest to prosecute the matter, this writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. 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: 17.09.2025 SNI 5 163 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.3880 of 2021 Dt.17.09.2025 SNI