APHC010105492026 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: 5864/2026 Between: 1. PIDATALA SASHI DEVI, W/O. VISWANATH REDDY, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. RESIDENT OF H.S. KOTTALA VILLAGE NANDYAL MANDAL AND DISTRICT. 2. SRI PIDATALA VISWANATH REDDY,, S/O. RANGA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS. RESIDENT OF H.S. KOTTALA VILLAGE, NANDYAL MANDAL AND DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NANDYAL DISTRICT NANDYAL. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NANDYAL NANDYAL DISTRICT. 4. THE SUBDIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, , NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 5. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICECUMSTATION HOUSE OFFICER, TALUKA-URBAN POLICE STATION, NANDYAL TOWN, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 6. K VENKATA LAKSHMI DEVI, D/O. VENKATA SESHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS. RESIDENT OF DOOR NO.27-282-29A BOMMALA SATRAM, NANDYAL TOWN AND MANDAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT. 2 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SATYANARAYANA NIMMALA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: <…to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction, declaring the action of Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 in interfering with a purely civil dispute and the lawful property rights of the Petitioners, on the behest of private respondents no.7 and 8, by illegally summoning the Petitioners to the police station, intimidating and threatening the Petitioners to settle the civil dispute, without registering any FIR or following due process of law, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and without jurisdiction, being violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 not to interfere with the civil and property rights of the Petitioners…= 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. The learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that Respondent Nos.4 to 6, at the behest of unofficial Respondents, illegally interfered in a purely civil property dispute by summoning the Petitioners to the police station without registering any FIR. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the grievance petition filed by the Respondent No.6 was forwarded to the Police, who conducted only a preliminary enquiry as directed by superior officers; the Petitioners and their daughter appeared 3 voluntarily, were not detained, and no FIR was registered since the complainant herself opted for amicable settlement; hence, allegations of interference, intimidation, demand of money, or any wrongful action are denied, and it is clarified that the Police merely verified facts in discharge of their lawful duty, which does not amount to interference in civil disputes. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Respondent No.5 not to interfere henceforth in the civil dispute between the Petitioners and the unofficial Respondents. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dated: 03.03.2026 PRA 4 65 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 5864 of 2026 Date: 03.03.2026 PRA