APHC010519852024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] FRIDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 26976/2024 Between: 1. MEDAM SIREESHA REDDY, W/O. M.SUBHAKAR REDDY, AGED 39 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.76-14-228B, VENGAMAMBA RESIDENCY, TEACHERS COLONY, BHAVANIPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 2. M.SUBHAKAR REDDY, S/O. M.BRAHMA REDDY, AGED 42 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO.76-14-228B, VENGAMAMBA RESIDENCY, TEACHERS'S COLONY, BHAVANIPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, NTR POLICE COMMISSIONERATE, VIJAYAWDA CITY, NTR DISTRICT. 3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, WEST DIVISION, NTR POLICE COMMISSIONERATE, VIJAYAWDA CITY, NTR DISTRICT. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BHAVANIPURAM POLICE STATION, VIJAYAWADA CITY, KRISHNA 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 tomay be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of Respondent No.4 in summoning the petitioners to the 4th Respondents Police Station and interfering in the petitioners civil disputes Sn further interfering in the petitioners life and personal liberty without there being any proceedings or reasonable cause against the petitioners, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, unjust and violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequentially direct Respondent No. 4 herein not to call the Petitioners to 4th Respondents Police Station and further not to interfere in the civil disputes of the petitioners and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to direct Respondent No. 4 herein not to call the Petitioners to the 4th Respondents Police Station and further not to interfere in the civil disputes of the petitioners pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KONDEPUDI DWARAKA RAMESH Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 26976/2024 ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of Respondent No.4 in summoning the petitioners to the 4th Respondents Police Station and interfering in the petitioners civil disputes Sn further interfering in the petitioners life and personal liberty without there being any proceedings or reasonable cause against the petitioners, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, unjust and violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, consequentially direct Respondent No. 4 herein not to call the Petitioners to 4th Respondents Police Station and further not to interfere in the civil disputes of the petitioners and to pass…” 2. Heard Sri Kondepudi Dwaraka Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is a case of interference of police in the civil disputes. 4. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that based on the complaint lodged by Maganti Sireesha, respondent-police was registered a case against the petitioners and one B.Yashwant Kumar vide Cr.No.617 of 2024 U/Section 420 IPC dated 25.10.2024. He would further submit that, the petitioners were called to the police station for preliminary enquiry, but the petitioners did not turn up for preliminary enquiry. Except registration of the said crime, respondent police never threatened the petitioners or interfered in the civil disputes between the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, recording the same, the writ petition may be disposed of. 6. Recording the above said submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the parties except under due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA 02.01.2026 KKV HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 26976/2024 Dated. 02.01.2026 KKV 143 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: AMARAVATI MAIN CASE NO: WRIT PETITION NO: 26976/2024 PROCEEDING SHEET Sl. No. Date ORDER OFFICE NOTE 2. 02.01.2026 Dr.VJP,J The Writ Petition is disposed of. (Vide separate order) ________ Dr.VJP, J KKV