BELLAPUKONDA RAJESH v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/386/2026 · 2026-01-05
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 14230 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 14230 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010003812026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 386/2026 Between:
1. BELLAPUKONDA RAJESH, S/O. LATE.NARAYANA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O.SYDAPURAM VILLAGE, KADIRI RURAL MANDAL, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT, PUTTAPARTY.
3. THE SUBDIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER DSP, KADIRI SUB DIVISION, KADIRI.
4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KADIRI RURAL POLICE STATION, KADIRI.
5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, KADIRI RURAL POLICE STATION, KADIRI.
6. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, KADIRI RURAL POLICE STATION, KADIRI.
7. B YESHODAMMA, W/O. LATE.VENKATANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O.D.NO.14-197, SYDAPURAM, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT-515519.
2
8. BELLAPUKONDAJANARDHANA, S/O.SANKARAPPA,8.
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O.D.NO.14-197, SYDAPURAM, KADIRI, SRI SATYA SAI DISTRICT-515519
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
3
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 386/2026
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer:
“…to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent Nos.4 to 6 in interfering with our possession and enjoyment over the land in an extent of Ac.0.46 cents in Sy.No.180-1 of Sydapuram Village, Kadiri Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District and directing us to hand over the possession of the said land to the respondent Nos.7 and 8, even though there is an injunction granted in our favour vide Order dated 29.07.2025 in I.A.No.375 of 2025 in O.S.No.24/2025 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri and the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge, Kadiri as arbitrary, illegal, colorable exercise of power and quite contrary to the well established legal principles being laid down by the Hon'ble Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court from time to time apart from being violative of the Fundamental and Constitutional Rights guaranteed to me under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent Nos.4 to 6 not to interfere with my peaceful possession enjoyment over the land in an extent of Ac.0.46 cents in Sy.No.180-1 of Sydapuram Village, Kadiri Mandal, Sri Sathya Sai District.…”
2. Heard Sri B. Abhay Siddhanth Mootha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that basing on the hospital intimation along with the statement of the injured person i.e., one Smt. Bellapukonda Reddamma, a case has been registered in Cr.No.02 of 2026 of Kadiri Town Police Station,
4
under Sections 329(3), 115(2), 351(2) r/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023 against the petitioner and others. He would further submit that basing on the complaint of the petitioner’s mother, a case in Cr.No.05 of 2026 of Kadiri Town Police Station, under Sections 329(3), 118(1) r/w 3(5) of BNS, 2023 was registered against the unofficial respondents on the same incident. The petitioner was called to the police station relating to the crime which has been registered against him. The police never interfered in the civil disputes between the parties.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of.
5. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the respondent-police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the parties, except under due process of law. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 06.01.2026. UPS
5
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
WRIT PETITION NO: 386/2026
Dated.06.01.2026
UPS