APHC010150172026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 8157/2026 Between: 1. POTTA APPALA NARASIMHAM, S/O. LATE SAMBA KUMAR, MALE, AGE 45 YEARS. ADVOCATE, R/O. D.NO. 4-5-32, R.K.APPARTMENTS WOODPETA, ANAKAPALLE- 531001. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY PRINCIPLE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, NELAPADU, AMARAVATHI-522 202. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VISHAKHAPATNAM CITY, VISHAKHAPATNAM-530004. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MAHARANIPETA II TOWN POLICE STATION, VISHKHAPATNAM-530002. 4. BOYINAPALLI BHAGAVAN, S/O.SOMESWARA RAO, MALE, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.28-2-30, NATIONAL BUILDING, NEAR TURNER CHOULTRY, MAIN ROAD, VISAKHAPATNAM-530002. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MANGENA SREE RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2 The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: “…to issue a writ, order or a direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in interfering into civil disputes and threatening to dispossess me and my tenant from the commercial property bearing Door No.28-2-30, near Turner Choultry, Visakhapatnam without following due process of law and insisting me to settle the civil disputes with unofficial respondent as illegal, irregular, arbitrary and violative of provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 and also offends Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent not to interfere into the civil disputes…” 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Mr.Mangena Sree Rama Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that Respondent No.3 Police is interfering in civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.4, and is threatening to dispossess the Petitioner and his tenant from the commercial property bearing Door No.28‑2‑30, near Turner Choultry, Visakhapatnam, without following due process of law. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that Respondent No.3 only acted upon a complaint received through PGRS, which was forwarded by Respondent No.2 for enquiry. In response to the said complaint, Respondent No.3 called the concerned persons, including the alleged persons Zakir Ali and Kalu, only for the purpose of conducting a preliminary enquiry to ascertain the facts. No coercive action, threat, or illegal interference was made by Respondent No.3. 3 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 Police not to interfere henceforth in the civil dispute between the Petitioner and the Respondent No.4 without following due process of law. 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 Date: 30.03.2026 PRA 4 53 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 8157 of 2026 Date: 30.03.2026 PRA