APHC010230362026 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: 11884/2026 Between: 1. SARIKA VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O RAMAKRISHNA, AGED 40 YEARS, R/0.8-3-321/A/366, SRI KRISHNA NAGAR YUSUFGUDA, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA - 500045 2. SARIKA SATHI ANNAPURNA,, W/O SARIKA VENKATESWARA RAO, AGED 40 YEARS, R/O.8-3-321/A/366, SRI KRISHNA NAGAR, YUSUFGUDA, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA - 500045. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522238. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ANDHRA PRADESH, DGP OFFICE, AP POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT-522502. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT, TIRUPATHIRAYACHOTI ANDHRA PRADESH-517501. 4. THE SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, NAIDUPETA DIVISION, NAIDUPETA, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT-524126. 2 5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NAIDUPETA POLICE STATION, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT-524126. 6. PULUGULLA RAMADEVI, W/O NARASIMHULU, AGED. 45 YEARS, R/O SRI RAM NAGAR, NAIDUPETA TOWN, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT - 524126. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. MALIREDDY GOWTHAM 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 issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondent No.5 in harassing the Petitioners by arresting them, confiscating their mobiles and detaining them in Police Station to settle civil disputes is illegal, arbitrary and discriminative and violative Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently direct Respondent No.5 not to harass and threaten the Petitioners by arresting and detaining them at Police Station and to release their confiscated mobile phones…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for Petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Mr. Malireddy Gowtham, learned counsel for the Petitioners, submits that Respondent No.5 has been harassing the Petitioners by arresting them, confiscating their mobile phones, and detaining them in the Police Station in order to settle disputes between the Petitioners and Respondent No.6. 3 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the allegations made by the Petitioners in their affidavit are totally false. 5. As seen from the record, it appears that a case in Cr.No.371/25 on the file of the Naidupet Police Station, Tirupathi District, was registered against the Petitioners, and in that connection, their mobile phones were taken by Respondent No.5. Both the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader submit that the mobile phones have been returned to the Petitioners. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Respondent Police not to interfere henceforth in the civil dispute between the Petitioners and Respondent No.6. 7. Accordingly, 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 4 141 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 11884 of 2026 Date: 04.05.2026 PRA