Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1082 (AP)

KASTHURI RAJESWARI v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/3083/2026 · 2026-04-08

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010052482026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 3083/2026 Between: 1. KASTHURI RAJESWARI, W/O. LATE SREENIVASULU, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O. C.KAMMAPALLI, CHIYYARAVAM, KONETI RAJU KANDRIKA, CUDDPAH, ANDHRA PRADESH - 516 101 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, AP POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, MANGALAGIRI, AMARAVATHI.522503 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT, TIRUPATHI.516115 4. THE ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, RAJAMPETA SUB-DIVISION, ANNAMYYA DISTRICT.516115 . 5. THE SHO, RLY KODUR URBAN POLICE STATION, RLY KODUR.516101 6. BALU MALLIKHARJUNA, S/O. NARASIMHULU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O. C. KAMMAPALLI VILLAGE, RLY KODUR MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.516115 2 7. BALU VIJAYA KUMARI, W/O. MAIN KARJUNA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS. 8. KAPERLA SREENIVASULU, S/O. RAM NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O. VARADHAIAHGARIPALLI VILLAGE, RAJAMPET MANDAL OF ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.516115 9. 9. KAPERAL NAGESWARA, S/O. RAM NARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O. VARADHAIAHGARIPALLI VILLAGE, RAJAMPET MANDAL OF ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.516115 LO. 10. BALU SIVA NANDU SIVA, AGED 18 YEARS, S/O B. MALLIKHARJUNA, R/O C. KAMMAPALLI VILLAGE, RLY KODUR MANDAL OF ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.516115 11 . 11. BALU SOMASEKHAR, AGED 16 YEARS, S/O B. MALLIKHARJUNA, R/O C. KAMMAPALLI VILLAGE, RLY KODUR MANDAL OF ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.516115 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VMR LEGAL Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: <…to issue a writ, more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the inaction of the respondent police in not invoking the relevant and appropriate penal provisions in respect of Crime No. 143 of 2025 the file of Rly Kodur Urban Police Station, Annamayya District, despite theon existence of sufficient material and medical evidence disclosing commission of such offences, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondent police to conduct further investigation under Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. in Crime No.143 of 2025 on the file of Rly Kodur Urban Police Station, Annamayya District, by adding the appropriate penal provisions in accordance with law…= 3 2. Heard the learned counsel for Petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Respondent Police have not been conducting the investigation on proper lines in Crime No.143 of 2025 on the file of Railway Kodur Urban Police Station, Annamayya District, despite the fact that the victim suffered serious injuries which endangered his life. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that a thorough investigation was conducted in Crime No.143 of 2025 by the Station House Officer, Railway Kodur Urban Police Station, and a charge sheet was filed on 10.11.2025 before the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Railway Koduru. 5. In view of the above and recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate, if aggrieved, by way of filing a private complaint under Section 190 read with Section 200 of 8the Cr.P.C.,9 / Section 210 read with 223 of 8the BNSS9 challenging the findings of the Investigating Officer. 6. On filing of such private complaint by the Petitioner before the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate, the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate is directed to bestow his attention to the same and deal with the complaint in accordance with law. 4 7. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 09.04.2026 PRA 5 229 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 3083 of 2026 Date: 09.04.2026 PRA