Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2631 (AP)

K SAINATH SARMA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

WP/13986/2026 · 2026-05-07

Y Lakshmana Rao

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010250142026 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: 13986/2026 Between: K SAINATH SARMA, S/O RAJA SEKHAR, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. NEAR AYYAPPA SWAMI TEMPLE, KAMALAPURAM VILLAGE KAMALAPURAM MANDAL, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522237 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT, KADAPA - 516001. 3. THE STATE HOUSE OFFICER, KAMALAPURARM POLICE STATION. KAMALAPURAM, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT - 516289. 4. C M SURESH NAIDU, S/O MUNASWAMY NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. KAMALAPURAM VILLAGE, KAMALAPURAM MANDAL, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT - 516289. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: RAJENDRA C Counsel for the Respondent(S): 2 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.13986 of 2026 Dated 08.05.2026 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 a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature a WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondents particularly 4th respondent at the instance and instigation of the 4th Respondent in repeatedly summoning to the Police Station harassing me exerting undue pressure and threatening me to settle a purely civil money dispute which does not disclose any cognizable offence as illegal irregular irrational without any authority of law and volative of Articles 14 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with my life personal liberty and pass….” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Mr. Chandragiri Rajendra, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that respondent No.4 is repeatedly summoning the petitioner to the police station and harassing him by exerting undue pressure and threatening him to settle a purely civil money dispute, which does not disclose any cognizable offence. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, submits that the police have never interfered in the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent. 5. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and recording the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government 3 Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.13986 of 2026 Dated 08.05.2026 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 respondent, without following due process of law. 6. However, in the event of registration of any crime against the petitioner, the investigating officer is at liberty to proceed against the petitioner 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.13986 of 2026 Dated 08.05.2026 325 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 13986 of 2026 Date: 08.05.2026 RSI