APHC010099722020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 6083/2020 Between: 1. Y. BALA MUNI REDDY,, S/O. PEDDA MUNI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, RIO. H.NO.23-29-3, NAULAKATTA VEEDHI, 23 WARD, JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, YSR KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, JAMMALAMADUGU URBAN POLICE STATION, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE. 5. VEERAMREDDY SURAYANARAYANA REDDY, S/O.NAGI REDDY, R/O.S.UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, JAMMALAMADUGU MANDL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE 6. VEERAMREDDY KRISHNA VENI, W/O. SURYANARAYANA REDDY, R/O.S.UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, JAMMALAMADUGU MANDL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE. 7. VEERAMREDDI PETA LAKSHMI NARAYANAMMA, W/O. OBUL REDDY, R/O.S.UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, JAMMALAMADUGU. MANDL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE 8. MARAMREDDIGARI BUCHAMMAGRI LAKSHMI PRASAD REDDY, S/O. BAYYA REDDY, AGE 48 YEARS, R/O.S.UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, JAMMALAMADUGU MANDL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. 9. MARAMREDDIGARI LAKSHMI PRASAD REDDY, S/O. BAYYA REDDY, AGE 48 YEARS, R/O.S.UPPALAPADU VILLAGE, JAMMALAMADUGU MANDL, YSR KADAPA 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 to issue an appropriate writ, or order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in not registering the complaint filed by the petitioner dated 24.09.2019 against the respondents 5 to 9 as illegal, arbitrary and violating of Principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to register on the complaint filed by the petitioner on 24.09.2019 against the respondents 5 to 9 IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 4 to register the complaint against the respondents 5 to 9 as per the contents of the complaints dated 24.09.2019 filed by the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. D KODANDARAMI REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 6083 of 2020 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in not registering the complaint filed by the petitioner dated 24.09.2019 against the respondents 5 to 9 as illegal arbitrary and violating of Principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to register on the complaint filed by the petitioner on 24.09.2019 against the respondents 5 to 9 and to pass.…” 2. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri D.Kodanda Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that despite the complaint made by the petitioner on 24.09.2019, no crime has been registered by the police against the unofficial respondents, till date. Learned counsel would further submit that a direction may be given to the respondent-police. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit that as the subject matter is civil in nature, no crime has been registered by the police. He further submitted that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 5. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner is at liberty to workout his remedy before the appropriate forum according to law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ Dr.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 10th September, 2025 RKS