APHC010054162026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 3387/2026 Between: 1. AREKULA KUMAR, S/O. A. SAYANNA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O. H. NO. 40/714, DHARMAPETA, KURNOOL TOWN AND CITY, KURNOOL DISTRICT - 518004 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPLIDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DIST.522239. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL.518001 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL.518001 4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KURNOOL DISTRICT, KURNOOL. 518001 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KURNOOL II TOWN POLICE STATION, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT. 518001 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G M SWAMULU 2 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 or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not disposing of my representation dated 02.01.2026 to initiate the proceedings against the respondents No 4 and 5 and consequential action of the Respondents No 4 and 5 in not taking steps on the petitioners complaint with regard to threatening calls from various persons is as illegal arbitrary unconstitutional against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the Respondents 2 and 3 to take appropriate steps against the respondents No 4 and 5 by duly considering the application of the petitioner dated 02 01 2026 and to pass…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Mr.Swamulu, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that despite his representation dated 02.01.2026, the Respondent Nos.2/District Collector, Kurnool and Respondent No.3/Superintendent of Police, Kurnool have failed to take action against Respondent Nos.4 and 5, who allegedly interfered in matters concerning property disputes and caste certificate issues. 4. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the representation dated 02.01.2026 of the Petitioner was acted upon. A preliminary enquiry was conducted under Section 173(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘BNSS’), and it was found that the complaint is civil and revenue in nature. The petitioner was informed of this and acknowledged receipt of the 3 enquiry report. It is further submitted that Respondent Nos.2 and 3 have no authority to initiate departmental or legal proceedings againstRespondent Nos.4 and 5, and that the petitioner has filed several writ petitions earlier on similar issues, all of which were closed or dismissed.There is an alternative efficacious remedy available to the petitioner by way of filing a private complaint before the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate by way of filing a complaint under Section 190 read with Section 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ / Section 210 read with 223 of ‘the BNSS’. 5. On filing of such private complaint by thepetitioner 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. 6. 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: 06.02.2026 PRA 4 352 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 3387 of 2026 Date: 06.02.2026 PRA