APHC010089032026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 4891/2026 Between: 1. GORLA NARASIMHA REDDY,, SON OF G.GOPI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.4-32, WARD NO.8, AUMUIIANKA, GAMPALA GUDEM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, NTR DISTRICT-521403 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETAIY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522238 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, , STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH O/O. MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522503 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, COMMISSIONARATE, VIJAYAWADA CITY, NTR DISTRICT-520001 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SATYANARAYANAPURAM POLICE STATION VIJAYAWADA CITY, NTR DISTRICT-520011 5. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, SATYANARAYANAPURAM POLICE STATION, VIJAYAWADAYA CITY, NTR DISTRICT-520011 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V SURENDRA REDDY 2 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking 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 4th respondent Police, calling to the police station in order to settle a private dispute without their being any complaint whatsoever and calling to the police station without an notice as prescribed under the scheme of BNSS is bad, illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of guidelines of Arnesh Kumar judgment against a victim being suffering in the hands of syndicate and lost more than 2.75 crores of money and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondent herein to take action against the 4th respondent under the guidelines of Arnesh Kumar judgment for calling to the police station without a statutory notice….” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Mr. V. Surendra Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that Respondent No.4/Police has been calling the Petitioner to the police station in order to settle a private dispute, without there being any complaint on record. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submits that the police received a PGRS petition vide NTR 202602093038 dated 09.02.2026, filed by Nalla Madhusudhana Rao before the Commissioner of Police, NTR Police Commissionerate, Vijayawada. On receipt, a case was registered against the Petitioner, and Respondent No.4 contacted him over phone to enquire about the petition. The Petitioner stated he would visit the police station but has not appeared till date. 3 5. Considering the above submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Respondent No.4 not to call further the Petitioner to the police station unnecessarily without following due process of law. If it is found that the Petitioner has committed any offence, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to take appropriate action 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: 27.02.2026 PRA 4 52 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 4891 of 2026 Date: 27.02.2026 PRA