1 APHC010710672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] SATURDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 36389/2025 Between: Mittapalli Chandra Mohan ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Ap and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. SOMISETTY GANESH BABU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. 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 an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.s 2 and 3 in not providing the police protection upon the representation made by the petitioner to the respondent Nos.2 and 3 against unofficial respondent Nos.5 to 8 who are illegally trespassing into the petitioners property and threatening intimidating and harassing the petitioner and his family member as illegal arbitrary irrational unconstitutional and in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and to consequently direct the respondent 2 police authorities to provide immediate effective and adequate police protection to the petitioner and his family members Direct the police authority to take necessary action against the respondent Nos.5 to 8 herein and to pass such orders….” 2. Sri Somisetty Ganesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner submitted a representation dated 15.12.2025 to respondent Nos.2 and 3 against unofficial respondent Nos.5 to 8, alleging that they have illegally trespassed into the petitioner’s property and are threatening, intimidating, and harassing the petitioner and his family members. 3. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is one of the witnesses in Crime No.114 of 2025 and is the victim in Crime No.115 of 2025, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of the Financial Establishments Act, 1999. He further submits that the police attempted to summon the petitioner, but he did not respond and instead filed the present petition by making false allegations. However, he fairly admits that the petitioner had sent a representation to the Station House Officer, Narasaraopet Police Station, through speed post and that the said representation is pending consideration before the 3rd respondent. 4. Be that as it may, whenever any representation is submitted by the petitioner to the 3rd respondent, the 3rd respondent is expected to consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. Further, since the petitioner is a 3 witness in one crime and a victim in another crime, he is entitled to necessary protection from the investigating officer. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the 3rd respondent is directed to provide necessary protection to the petitioner, who is a witness in one case and a victim in another case. The 2nd respondent is further directed to dispose of the petitioner’s representation within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law. 6. In view of the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J. Date: 31.01.2026 KMS 4 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION No.36389 of 2025 Date: 31.01.2026 KMS 69 5