APHC010682592025 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 HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 35171/2025 Between: DEVATHI JANAKIRAMAIAH, S/O.VENKATESWARLU, AGED 56 YEARS, R/O.D.NO.24-127/3, CHILAKALURIPET, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 522616. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NARASAROPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NARASAROPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHILAKALURIPET TOWN POLICE STATION. 5. GORREPATI SUBHASHINI, M/O. RAHELU.AGED 45, ADDRESS 33- 147, SANJEEV NAGAR,CHILAKALURIPET, PURUSHOTHA PATNAM,PALNADU DT- 522616. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B V SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ of Mandamus declaring the illegal, arbitrary and high-handed action of Respondent No.4 in repeatedly summoning the Petitioner to the Police Station at the instance of Respondent No.5, coercing him to execute his self-acquired properties in favour of Respondent No.5, and further 2 threatening to implicate him in false criminal cases including offences under the SC/ST (POA) Act for his refusal to comply, as wholly without jurisdiction and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the Petitioner under Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct Respondent No.4 not to summon, threaten, interfere with the purely civil and property disputes of the Petitioner at the behest of Respondent No.5 except strictly in accordance with law.” 2. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that, on the complaint given by Respondent No.5, the Petitioner was called for preliminary enquiry, however, no case is registered against the Petitioner. It is further submitted that the Police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the parties. 3. Sri B.V.Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that, recording the same, the petition may be disposed of. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, Police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.5, except under due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:02.01.2026 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.35171 of 2025 Dt.02.01.2026 Dinesh