APHC010677682025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 35107/2025 Between: 1.BANKA LAKSHMI REDDY, S/O. BANKA THIMMAREDDY, AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS, R/O. KOTTAPETA VILLAGE, PRODDATUR MANDAL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF AP, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI. 2.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, KADAPA. 3.THE SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, PRODDATUR. YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 4.THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PRODDATUR RURAL CIRCLE, PRODDATUR. YSR KADAPA DISTRICT 5.THE S H O, PRODDATUR RURAL P.S., PRODDATUR. YSR KADAPA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.KALEEMULLA S Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME 2 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 direction or an order or a writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondent No 5 in registering the F I R on the report of the petitioner or on the endorsement of the 2nd Respondent dated 27 10 2025 made to the 5th Respondent regarding the commission of the cognizable offence of cheating against the petitioner as illegal arbitrary and in violation of the precedent of the Honble Supreme Court in Lalitha Kumari Vs Govt of U P and Others reported in 2014 2 SCC 1 and in violation of Section 173 3 of B N S S and consequently to direct the 5th Respondent to register the FIR on the above report of the petitioner as per law and to pass…” 2. Sri Syed Kaleemulla, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the compliant of the Petitioner dated 27.10.2025 submitted to Respondent No.5 was not registered, even though it discloses commission of a cognizable offence. 3. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submit that that police after conducting preliminary enquiry as contemplated under Section 173(3) of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ noticed it is a commercial transaction civil in nature. 4. Be that as it may, if the compliant of the Petitioner is not registered by the Station House Officer, as a F.I.R the Petitioner has got an alternative efficacious remedy available under Section 190 read with Section 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’/Section 210 read with 223 of ‘the BNSS.’ 5. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the Petitioner to approach the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate by 3 way of filing complaint under Section 190 read with Section 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’/Section 210 read with 223 of ‘the BNSS.’ 6. With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ Dr. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Dated:03.02.2026 VTS