APHC010022892026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 3328/2026 Between: 1. ARAVA KARTHIK KUMAR, C/O ARAVAPEDABABURAO, ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/P DOOR NO.56 BESIDE YES BANK ATM, VISAKHAPATNAM - 530008 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM POLICE COMMISIONERATE, 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, 5TH TOWN POLICE STATION, KANCHARAPALEM, COMMISSIONERATE, 530008. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAJESH MATCHA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 3328/2026 ARAVA KARTHIK KUMAR, C/O ARAVAPEDABABURAO, ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/P DOOR NO.56-34-3/2, THOTAVEEDHI, BESIDE YES BANK ATM, GOLLAKANCHARAPALEM, 530008 ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM POLICE SURYA BAGH VISAKHAPATNAM-20. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, 5TH TOWN POLICE STATION, VISAKHAPATNAM POLICE COMMISSIONERATE, KANCHARAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsel for the Respondent(S): IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3521] THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO ARAVA KARTHIK KUMAR, C/O ARAVAPEDABABURAO, AGED THOTAVEEDHI, GOLLAKANCHARAPALEM, ...PETITIONER PRINCIPAL SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM POLICE -53008 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, 5TH TOWN POLICE STATION, VISAKHAPATNAM POLICE KANCHARAPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM - ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 The Court made the following ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: “….….. to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent Police in forcing the petitioner herein to come to a compromise with the third party and if not, threatening to arrest the petitioner herein without proper reasons and implicate him into new criminal offences based on false and fabricated accusations as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Human Rights enshrined in the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to not take any coercive steps against the petitioner herein and not to interfere in the personal life of the petitioner in the guise of settlement without following the due process of law”. 2. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been called to the police station by respondent No.3 unnecessarily and he was made to sit for hours together and was subjected to harassment, which is against the articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 4. Sri M. Ajay, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, submits that one Mounika lodged a complaint against the petitioner alleging that he had betrayed her under the guise of marriage, had sexual intercourse with her, made her pregnant, and later refused to marry her. 5. Be that as it may, when a complaint lodged by a third party disclosing any commission of a cognizable offence, the respondent No.3, as per section 173(2) of the B.N.S.S, has got an authority to conduct a preliminary enquiry and, on such enquiry, he may take appropriate action in accordance with law. 3 6. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, further submits that except for the purpose of conducting a preliminary enquiry as contemplated under due process of law, the petitioner was never harassed by respondent No.3. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner had lodged a complaint against the third party i.e., Mounika, alleging that she intimidated the petitioner and his mother by threatening to commit suicide and to implicate them in a false case. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent No.3 not to harass the petitioner and not to call him unnecessarily, except as permitted under due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 04.02.2026 Note: Issue C.C. by tomorrow B/o SAK 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.3328 of 2026 Date: 04.02.2026 SAK