Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8476 (AP)

SRI REDDY SURYA RAO v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/4076/2019 · 2025-08-18

B V L N Chakravarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010091802019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION NO: 4076/2019 Between: 1. SRI REDDY SURYA RAO, SON OF (LATE) DEMUDU, AGED 50 YRS BUSINESS, R/AT TARVA VILLAGE, DEVARAPALLE MANDAL VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HOME) SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DEVARAPALI P.S., DEVARAPALLI , VISAKHAPATNAM DIST., 3. SUPERINTENDANT OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM RURAL, VISAKHAPATNAM . 4. BUDL MUTYALANALDU, SON OF VENKINAIDU, AGED 50 YRS, KOTHAPENTA. 5. MALIREDDY MAHALAKSHMI NALDU, SON OF PYDANNA, AGED 48, TARUVA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 6. MALIREDDY SRINIVASA RAO, SON OF PYDANNA, AGED 48, TARUVA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 7. MATHALA SREENU, SON OF VENKATA RAMANA, AGED 40 YRS, TARUVA, VISAKHAPATNAM DIST., 8. CHOPPA SREENU, SON OF VENKNAIDU, AGED 40 YRS, TARUVA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT., 2 9. BATHI BUCHAIASH NAIDU, SON OF GANGULU, AGED 55 YRS, TARUVA, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. R SIVA SAI SWARUP Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. MURALIDHAR JAMMULA The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No.4076 OF 2019 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “….to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the in-action of the 3rd Respondent Police Not Conducting Investigation the matter nor filing any final report in connection with F.I.R.,No.05/2009 dt.6.2.2009 of Devarapalli P.S., registered under sections 307 read with 34,147,148,506 of IPC and sections 3(xiv) of SC/ST POA Act even though the petitioner moving before the third respondent all the time periodically continuously and the police non taking any action or moving anything only to support the un official respondents there by violated the procedure as contemplated under the law is illegal , arbitrary , violation of law and procedure consequently to direct the Respondent Police particularly 3rd Respondent to conduct investigation and to submit a Report before the Concerned Court or otherwise the petitioner will be put to suffer a serious loss and hardship and to pass…” 2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on written instructions would submit that Crime No.5 of 2009 of Devarapalli Police Station, Anakapalle District, was investigated into by the police. Later, police filed final report referring the case as ‘false’, and referred report was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chodavaram, vide Reference Case No.34 of 2009, dated 05.10.2009. 3. In that view of the matter, nothing remains in the writ petition for further adjudication. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the concerned Court for necessary redressal in accordance with law. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed at the stage of admission without going into merits of the case. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI 19.08.2025 Pmk 5 16 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No:4076 OF 2019 Date: 19.08.2025 Pmk