APHC010116432026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 6756/2026 Between: Kotari Ephraim ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KOTHA LEELA GANESH RAGHAVENDRA 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 nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in not registered a crime basing on the petitioners complaint dated 08102025 against the Kakumanu Rajesh Pamidi Hari Prasad and others is as illegal arbitrary and abdication of the statutory duty cast on him and violate the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3RD respondent to register a crime basing on the petitioners compliant dated 08102025 against the Kakumanu Rajesh Pamidi Hariprasad and unidentified persons and pass other order(s)…” 2 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. Perused the record. 3. Sri K.L. Ganesh Raghavendra, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that even though the petitioner has submitted a complaint, the respondent No.3 has not registered it. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, submits that the petitioner lodged the complaint nearly three months after the alleged offence. The police, in order to conduct a preliminary enquiry, attempted to secure the alleged accused named in the complaint, but in vain. It is further submitted that, upon perusal of the complaint, Respondent No.3 noticed that the allegations are non-cognizable in nature. The learned Assistant Government Pleader further submitted that there are civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents. 5. Be that as it may, if any representation made by the petitioner is not being considered by respondent No.3, the petitioner has an alternative, effective, and efficacious remedy under Section 190 read with Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, or under Section 210 read with Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, “the BNSS”), by approaching the jurisdictional Magistrate. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate for redressal of his grievance by filing a complaint under Section 3 190 read with Section 200 of „the Cr.P.C.,‟ / Section 210 read with Section 223 of „the BNSS‟. 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: 12.03.2026 KMS 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.6756 of 2026 Date: 12.03.2026 KMS 105