Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2338 (AP)

Podapati Subramanyam v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/14046/2026 · 2026-05-07

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010263432026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 14046/2026 Between: 1. PODAPATI SUBRAMANYAM, , S/O. LATE NARASIMHAM, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. DEVUDU CHERUVU, ONGOLE TOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 2. PODAPATI BALAJI,, S/O. LATE NARASIMHAM, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, OCC PVT. EMPLOYEE, R/O. DEVUDU CHERUVU, ONGOLE TOWN AND MANDAL, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPT, A.P, SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI -522 238, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, ONGOLE TOWN PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 523 001 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SINGARAYAKONDA CIRCLE, SINGARAYAKONDA PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 523 101 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SINGARAYAKONDA PBLICE STATION, SINGARAYAKONDA, PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 523 101 5. PODAPATIVIJAYAMMA, S/O. SIVAIAH, AGED 40 YEARS, OCD HOUSEWIFE, R/O. SINGARAYAKONDA VILLAGE AND MANDAL PRAKASAM DISTRICT. 523 101 ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.14046 of 2026 Dated 08.05.2026 Counsel for the Petitioner(S): VENKATESWARLU SANISETTY 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 or Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the approach of the respondent no 3 and 4 in supporting the respondent no 5 and interfering and threatening the petitioners with dire consequences and not allowing them enter into their premises in respect of Plot No. 83 admeasuring Ac.0.05 cents in Sy No 698 of Singarayakonda Village of inspite of decree passed by a competent civil court in O S No. 167 of 2007 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge Kandukur and the execution proceedings vide E P No. 73 of 2008 which is highly illegal arbitrary unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents no 3 and 4 not to interfere and threaten the petitioners with instigation of the respondent no 5 when they enter into their property in respect of Plot No 83 admeasuring Ac.0. 05 cents in Sy No. 698 of Singarayakonda Village and to pass….” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Mr. Sanisetty Venkateswarlu, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that respondent Nos.3 and 4, supporting respondent No.5, are interfering with the petitioners’ possession and threatening them with dire consequences, and are not allowing them to enter into their premises in respect of Plot No.83 admeasuring Ac.0.05 cents in Sy.No.698 of Singarayakonda Village, despite the decree passed by the competent Civil 3 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.14046 of 2026 Dated 08.05.2026 Court in O.S.No.167 of 2007 on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge, Kandukur, and the execution proceedings in E.P.No.73 of 2008. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submits that the police have never interfered in the civil disputes pending between the petitioners and the unofficial respondents. 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 petitioners and the unofficial respondent, without following due process of law. 6. However, in the event of registration of any crime against the petitioners, the investigating officer is at liberty to proceed against the petitioners in accordance with law. 7. 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: 08.05.2026 RSI 4 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.14046 of 2026 Dated 08.05.2026 327 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 14046 of 2026 Date: 08.05.2026 RSI