APHC010227472020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 14985 of 2020 Between: 1. BAGGU SYAMALA, , W/O VENKATA VARMA, HINDU AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O GUNISETTIVARI VEEDHI, CHODAVARAM VILLAGE & MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 2. BAGGU SATYA CHANDRA SEKHAR,, S/O VENKATA VARMA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O GUNISETTIVARI VEEDHI, CHODAVARAM VILLAGE & MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, , REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT OF A.P., VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. KARANAM ESWARA RAO, S/O NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONERS, OCC CIRCLE INSPECTOR, CHODAVARAM POLICE CIRCLE OFFICE, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 4. D LAKSHMI NARAYANA, , S/O NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONERS, OCCSUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHODAVARAM POLICE STATION, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 5. DIYYA BHAVANI, W/O NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONERS, OCC SENIOR ASSISTANT, O/o. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 6. DIYYA ALLA LAKSHMI, W/O VENKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUNISETTIVARI VEEDHI, CHODAVARAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 7. DIYYA SANKAR, S/O CHITTI VENKATA RAO, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUNISETTIVARI VEEDHI, CHODAVARAM VILLAGE ANDMANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 8. DIYYA PRASAD, , S/O NARAYANASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUNISETTIVARI VEEDHI, CHODAVARAM VILLAGE AND MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 9. DIYYA TRINETRI, W/O LATE ESWARA CHANDRA RAO, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUNISETTIVARI STREET, CHODAVARAM VILLAGE & MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 10. DIYYA RAMKUMAR, S/O LATE ESWARA CHANDRA RAO, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUNISETTIVARI VEEDHI, CHODAVARAM VILLAGE& MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 11. DIYYA SIVA SANTOSHI APPAJI, S/O ESWARA CHANDRA RAO, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, RESIDENT OF GUNISETTIVARI VEEDHI, CHODAVARAM VILLAGE & MANDAL, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in actively supporting the respondents 5 to 11 for the purpose of dispossessing the petitioners from the suit schedule property which is subject matter of appeal in A.S.No.416 of 2019 on the file of Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam by interfering with the Civil disputes between the petitioners and respondents 6 to 11 pending the disposal of above said appeal is illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14&21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to investigate into Cr.No.955/2020 and report dt. 23.7.2020 presented by 2nd petitioner and report dt. 26.07.2020 presented by 1st petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner(S): T V SRI DEVI Counsel for the Respondent(S): GP FOR HOME THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 14985 of 2020 ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in actively supporting the respondents 5 to 11 for the purpose of dispossessing the petitioners from the suit schedule property which is subject matter of appeal in A.S.No.416 of 2019 on the file of Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam by interfering with the Civil disputes between the petitioners and respondents 6 to 11 pending the disposal of above said appeal is illegal, arbitrary, violative of Article 14&21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to investigate into Cr.No.955/2020 and report dt. 23.7.2020 presented by 2nd petitioner and report dt. 26.07.2020 presented by 1st petitioner.” 2. Heard Sri T.V.Sridevi, learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that the police are interfering in the civil dispute. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the police are actively supporting the respondents 5 to 11 for the purpose of dispossessing the petitioners from the suit schedule property which is subject matter of appeal in A.S.No.416 of 2019 on the file of Principal District Judge, Visakhapatnam. 4. The Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents, on instructions, would submit that police are not interfering in the civil dispute between the parties and the police never supported any of the unofficial respondents to settle the civil dispute in their favour. 5. Recording the same, the writ petition is disposed of. However, police are directed not to interfere in the civil dispute, except under due process of law. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 06.01.2026 ARB/JAK THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 325 WRIT PETITION NO: 14985 of 2020 Date: 06.01.2026 ARB/JAK