DARISAM BALA KOTAYYA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/11505/2026 · 2026-05-04
Y Lakshmana Rao
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2306 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 2306 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010210552026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 11505/2026 Between:
DARISAM BALA KOTAYYA, S/O CHINNA KOTAYYA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC PROPERTIES R/O D. NO. 12-72, GANTASALA VILLAGE AND MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT. 521133
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, A.P-522238
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KRISHNA DISTRICT.521001
3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KANKIPADU POLICE STATION, KRISHNA DISTRICT-521151
4. KODELA VASANTHA KUMARA, W/O SWAMI DAASU. AGED NOT KNOWN, OCC PROPERTIES R/O D. NO. 10-32, KRIATIAN PETA, KOLAVENNU VILLAGE KANKIPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT- 521153
5. KODELA CHAKRAVARTHY, S/O SWAMI DAASU. AGED ABOUT NOT KNOWN, OCC PROPERTIES R/O D. NO. 10-32, KRIATIAN PETA, KOLAVENNU VILLAGE KANKIPADU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT- 521153
...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
2 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.11505 of 2026 Dated 05.05.2026
KALLA TULASI DURGAMBA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
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 Mandamus directing the respondents more particularly the 3rd respondent / Station House Officer Kankipadu Police Station not to interfere in the purely civil dispute arising out of the lease agreement dated 20.11.2025 relating to vehicle No AP39US4823 further directing the respondents not to call the petitioner to the police station day after day or compel him to enter into any settlement in respect of the said civil dispute consequently directing the respondents not to threaten harass intimidate or send police personnel to the petitioners house for verification enquiry or coercion in relation to the said civil dispute further directing the respondents to act strictly in accordance with law and not to use police machinery to pressurize the petitioner in any civil or contractual matter and to pass such other order or orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and Pass….”
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Ms.
Kalla Tulasidurgamba, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that respondent No.3 is interfering in the civil disputes arising out of the lease agreement dated 20.11.2025 relating to vehicle No.AP39US4823, and is calling the petitioner to the police station repeatedly and compelling him to enter into a settlement in respect of the said civil dispute. 3 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.11505 of 2026 Dated 05.05.2026
4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submits that one Kodali Vasantha Kumari lodged a complaint alleging that the petitioner had taken a Maruthi Ertiga car bearing No.AP39US4823 on lease basis agreeing to pay monthly rent, but failed to pay the agreed amount, wrongfully retained the vehicle, and threatened the complainant with dire consequences. It is submitted that, upon receipt of the complaint, the respondent police called the petitioner only for the purpose of enquiry and verification of facts in discharge of their lawful duties, as the allegations disclosed issues relating to cheating, breach of trust, and intimidation. The learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that no coercive steps were taken against the petitioner at any point of time. 5. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and recording the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent police not to interfere henceforth in the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents, without following due process of law. 6. 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: 05.05.2026 RSI
4 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.11505 of 2026 Dated 05.05.2026
311 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 11505 of 2026
Date: 05.05.2026 RSI