APHC010092162026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 5389/2026 Between: MUNNAM VENKATA NAGESWARA REDDY, S/O KRISHNAMURTHY REDDY, AGED ABOUT _ YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, R/O PEDAGANJAM VILLAGE, CHINAGANJAM MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522238. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT AT ONGOLE - 523002. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHINAGANJAM POLICE STATION, PRAKASAM DISTRICT-523135. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: N RAVI PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP FOR HOME 2 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.5389 of 2026 Dated 03.03.2026 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 of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in frequently summoning the Petitioner to the Police Station including the incident last week and interfering with civil disputes at the behest of anti social elements as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd Respondents not to interfere with the Petitioners peaceful possession of the land in Pedaganjam Village and to pass ….= 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Mr. B. Surya Chandra, learned counsel representing Sri N. Ravi Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that respondent No.3 is frequently summoning the petitioner to the police station, in view of the incident that occurred last week, and is interfering with the civil disputes at the behest of anti-social elements. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that, as per the records of respondent No.3, no representation was received from the petitioner or against the petitioner, and no cases are registered against the petitioner. It is further submitted that, after receipt of the present Writ Petition, respondent No.3 conducted an enquiry and it came to light that the matter is purely related to a civil issue. Hence, respondent No.3 has never interfered with the civil issue. It is further 3 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.5389 of 2026 Dated 03.03.2026 submitted that the petitioner was neither summoned to the police station nor interfered with in respect of his civil issue. 5. Considering the above submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent No.3 not to call the petitioner henceforth to the police station at the behest of anti-social elements and not to interfere with the civil disputes between the parties. 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: 03.03.2026 RSI 4 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.5389 of 2026 Dated 03.03.2026 121 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 5389 of 2026 Date: 03.03.2026 RSI