THAMMANENI BHASKAR REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/6137/2026 · 2026-03-04
Y Lakshmana Rao
Public Interest Litigationbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 18469 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 18469 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010112332026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 6137/2026 Between:
1.THAMMANENI BHASKAR REDDY, S/O. CHINNA VENKATAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/0.D.N0.1-3A, THAMMANENIPALLI VILLAGE, VELIGANDIA MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT, (OLD PRAKASAM). ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, PALNADU DISTRICT.522237 2.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT (OLD PRAKASAM).523316 3.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KANIGIRI POLICE STATION, KANIGIRI, KANIGIRI TOWN AND MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT (OLD PRAKASAM).523230 4.CHOPPARAPU VENKATA RAO, S/O.RAMANAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/O. D.NO. 3-3-A, 3RD WARD, BOYAPALEM, KANIGIRI NAGARAPANCHAYAT MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT (OLD PRAKASAM)-523230. 5.KETHINENI VENKATA RAO, S/O. VENKATESWARLU, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O. D.NO. 3-38, 3RD WARD, BOYAPALEM, KANIGIRI NAGARAPANCHAYAT MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT (OLD PRAKASAM)-523230. 2 6.CHOPPARAPU SIVA MALYADRI, S/O. THIRUPATHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS. R/O. D.NO. 3-8C, 3RD WARD, BOYAPALEM, KANIGIRI NAGARAPANCHAYAT MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT (OLD PRAKASAM)-523230. 7.CHILLA VENKATA SAI BABU, S/O.OBULU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O.
D.NO. 3-23, 3RD WARD, BOYAPALEM, KANIGIRI NAGARAPANCHAYAT MANDAL, MARKAPURAM DISTRICT (OLD PRAKASAM)-523230. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.PILLIX LAW FIRM 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 an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring that the inaction of respondents no 3 in not registering the Crime against respondent no 4 to 7 and not taking any action as per the provisions of Chapter XIII of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 on the report given by the petitioner dated 22012026 as illegal arbitrary unconstitutional and in violation of principles of natural justice Article 21 300A and consequently direct the respondents no 3 to forthwith register a crime against the respondents no 4 to 7 and the other culprits on the report given by the petitioner dated 2201 2026 as per the provisions of Chapter XIII of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha 2023 in the interest of justice and equity and to pass…”
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3.
Sri P.Kasi Nageswara Rao, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that a complaint dated 22.01.2026 was submitted by the Petitioner to the
3 Respondent No.3, but the same was not registered as a case in accordance with the procedure as contemplated under ‘BNSS’. 4. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the Writ Petition may be disposed of directing to consider the complaint by Respondent No.3. 5. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing Respondent No.3 to register the complaint dated 22.01.2026 submitted by the Petitioner if it discloses a cognizable offence, in accordance with law. 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: 05.03.2026 VTS