APHC010712332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 1637/2026 Between: 1. UDEMALLA SUDHAKARA REDDY, S/O FATE U.RAMI REDDY, AGED 59, BUSINESS, H.NO. 28/848-H2-2, N.G.O. COLONY, NANDYALA TOWN, KURNOOL DISTRICT.518502 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY IT S PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI VILLAGE, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 522503 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NANDYLA, NANDYAL DISTRICT.518502 3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TALUKA POLICE STATION, NANDYAL. NANDYAL DISTRICT. 4. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, 3RD TOWN POLICE STATION, NANDYAL, NANDYAL DISTRICT.518502 ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an Order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the Respondents 2 to 4 in registering the FIR on the petitioners complaint dated 15-9-2025 and 13- 10-2025 and complaints disclosed cognizable offence as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and keeping complaints under mute is against the ruling of Honorable Supreme Court held in VINOD KUMAR PANDEY and another Versus SEESH RAM SAINI and others dated 10-9-2025 and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to register the FIR and investigate into and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to follow the ruling of Honorable Supreme Court held in VINOD KUMAR PANDEY and another Versus SEESH RAM SAINT and others dated 10-9-2025 and register the F.I.R forthwith basing on the petitioner's complaint dated 15-9-2025 and 13- 10-2025, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. BUDIGE BHOJA RAAM Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 1637/2026 ORDER: The Writ petition is filed challenging the inaction of the respondent No.3 in registering an FIR on the complaint lodged by the petitioner. 2. Heard Sri Budige Bhoja Raam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for Home. 3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader on written instructions dated 29.12.2025 received from the 3rd respondent would submits that a PGRS petition was sent by the petitioner to the District Collector, Nandayal and it was routed through the Superintendent of Police, Nandyal, wherein the petitioner made allegations of kidnapping, robbery, criminal intimidation and assault allegedly occurred on 09.09.2025. He further submits that, on receiving PGRS petition, a preliminary enquiry was conducted by the Station House Officer “for short ‘SHO’. Upon detailed enquiry, it was revealed that no such incidents involving cognizable offence were occurred and there was no evidence of robbery, kidnapping, assault, criminal intimidation, or damage to property, as alleged by the petitioner. No contemporaneous complaint disclosing any cognizable offence was made at the relevant time. On 18.10.2025, the petitioner and the unofficial respondents were summoned to the police station. During enquiry, the petitioner remained silent and avoids answering questions. Hence, in the enquiry, it was clearly established that the dispute arose out of a commercial seed transaction which is civil in nature. 4. Indeed, as per Section 173(3)(i) and (ii) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the officer in charge of the police station may, with the permission of an officer not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, conduct an enquiry to ascertain whether there exists a prima facie case for proceeding in the matter. 5. In view of the above legal position, the writ petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional Magistrate for redressal of his grievance, if so advised, by filing an appropriate complaint. 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: 22.01.2026 KKV