Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2234 (AP)

KATTEPOGU NAGARANI v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/11289/2026 · 2026-05-03

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010198972026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 11289/2026 Between: 1. KATTEPOGU NAGARANI, W/O PRAKASH RAO, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O. 4-95, KRISHNAYAPALEM VILLAGE, MANGALAGIRI MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522503. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522 237. 2. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GUNTUR RANGE, GUNTUR-522004. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR - 522004. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, AMARAVATHI POLICE STATION, AMARAVATHI, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522 020. 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PEDDAKURAPADU POLICE STATION, PEDDAKAURAPADU, PALNADU DISTRICT, ERSTWHILE 2 GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 402. 6. DUPPATTI APPARA RAO, S/O. MASTANAIAH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCC MONEY LENDER, RIO. BALUSUPADU, PEDDAKURAPADU MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522 436. 7. ALANE VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O. NAGENDARA RAO AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCC MONEY LENDER, R/O. 26-38-86/7, A.T., AGRAHARAM, 13/4 LANE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522004. 8. NYNAVARAPU BHAVANA, D/O. VIJAYA SHAKER AGED ABOUT ,30 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, .. R/O. 6-122, KONERU BAZAR, ASWARAOPETA, KHAMMAM - 507301. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. KRANTHI KUMAR PASUMARTHI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: “…to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of the 2nd respondent in not consider the petitioner representation dated 1-04- 2026 in accordance with law is as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Principles of natural justice and violative of Art.14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 01-04- 2026 in accordance with law by decide jurisdiction of offence between 4th and 5th respondent police stations for reddresal of the petitioner's grievance…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for Petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3 3. Mr. Kranthi Kumar Pasumarthi, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that the representation dated 01.04.2026 submitted by the Petitioner to the Respondent Police has not been considered. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the representation dated 01.04.2026 submitted by the Petitioner was considered by way of conducting a preliminary enquiry, and it was noticed that the issue raised in the representation is civil in nature. 5. Be that as it may, if the representation discloses commission of a cognizable offence, and if the same has not been registered as an FIR, the Petitioner has got an alternative efficacious remedy of filing a private complaint before the Jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 190 read with Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity, ‘the Cr.P.C.,’) / under Section 210 read with Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’). 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate by way of filing a private complaint under Section 190 read with Section 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ / Section 210 read with 223 of ‘the BNSS’. 4 7. On filing of such private complaint by the Petitioner before the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate, the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate is directed to bestow his attention to the same and deal with the complaint in accordance with law. 8. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of. 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: 04.05.2026 PRA 5 145 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 11289 of 2026 Date: 04.05.2026 PRA