APHC010155422026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 8441/2026 Between: 1.S.CHITTEMNA, , W/O. LATE S.KRISHNAMA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS,D.NO.5-68, PEDDAGORPODU,GORPADU, PAKALA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT -517112. ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH .- 522237. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TIRUPATI DISTRICT - 517503. 3.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TIRUPATI, TIRUPATI DISTRICT, ANDHRA RRADESH - 517501. 4.THE STATIPN HOUSE OFFICER S H O OF PAKALA, , PAKALA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT-517112. 5.SURINENI SREENIVASULU NAIDU, S/O LATE SURINENI ANANTHAYA NAIDU, RESIDING AT PEDDAGORPADU,GORPADU, PAKALA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT -517112 CELL NO.99898 77313 6.SURINENI RAJESWARI, W/O SURINENI SREENIVASULU NAIDU RESIDING AT PEDDAGORPADU,GORPADU, PAKALA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT -517112 CELL NO.99898 77313 7.SURINENI PRATAP CHANDRA CHOWDARY, S/O SURINENI SREENIVASULU NAIDU RESIDING AT PEDDAGORPADU,GORPADU, 2 PAKALA MANDAL TIRUPATI DISTRICT -517112 CELL NO.88868 47755 8.BOYAPATI NAGARAJA NAIDU, S/O BOYAPATI CHENGAYYA NAIDU RESIDING AT NENDRA GUNTA, PAKALA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT -517112 CELL NO.99489 53742 9.B CHENGALRAYA NAIDU, SLO B GURAVAIAH NAIDU, RESIDING AT PEDDAGORPADU,GORPADU, PAKALA MANDAL, TIRUPATI DISTRICT -517112 CELL NO.96424 79364. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.RAYALCHERUVU ABISHEK REDDY 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 a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the above acts of the respondent No. 4 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Art.19(1)(g) and 14, 16 and 21 and 300A of constitution of India and direct the respondent No.1. to 3. to take immediate action against the respondent no. 4 for the above illegal acts and also direct the respondent No. 3 and 4 not to interfere in connection with civil disputes between the petitioner , her family members and the respondent No.5 to 9 and also direct the respondent No.3 to register the FIR against the respondent No.4 to 9 for illegal trespassing, property damage etc., and pass…” 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Sri Rayalcheruvu Abishek Reddy, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is the lawful possessor and beneficiary of the residential premises bearing D.No.12-24, Gorpadu Village, Kothavaddipalli 3 Gram Panchayat, Pakala Mandal, Tirupati District, acquired under a registered sale deed Doc.No.2061/2000 and duly mutated in the name of her deceased husband. The Petitioner and her children, being the natural heirs, have been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the said property. However, Respondent Nos.5 to 9, in collusion with Respondent No.4, the local police authority, have unlawfully and forcibly trespassed into the premises on 18.03.2026, breaking open the locks, damaging property, and attempting to seize valuable documents. Such acts, perpetrated under the cloak of political and police influence, amount to a blatant violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental rights under Articles 14, 16, 21, and 300A of the Constitution of India, and constitute an egregious abuse of authority by Respondent No.4, who is duty-bound to uphold the rule of law rather than facilitate private vendettas. 4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner requests that this Court to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the actions of Respondent No.4 as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional, and direct Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to forthwith initiate disciplinary and penal proceedings against Respondent No.4. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further urges restraining Respondent Nos.3 and 4 from interfering in civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos.5 to 9, and mandating registration of an FIR against Respondent Nos.4 to 9 for trespass, property damage, and unlawful harassment. 5. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the present Writ Petition is wholly misconceived, 4 bereft of merit, and liable to be dismissed in limine. The Petitioner, mother of the accused in Crime No.47/2026 of Pakala Police Station, seeks to portray lawful investigative acts as interference in civil disputes, whereas the record unequivocally demonstrates that the said crime was duly registered on 18.03.2026 upon the complaint of Respondent No.6 alleging damage to public pipelines, intimidation, and loss quantified at Rs.1,00,000/‑, attracting penal provisions under Sections 79, 126(2), 324(4), 352(2) read with Section 3(5) of ‘the BNS’. The police authorities, acting strictly within the ambit of their statutory powers, have conducted investigation by visiting the locus, examining witnesses, and collecting material evidence in accordance with procedure established by law. The allegations of arbitrariness, illegality, or abuse of power are thus demonstrably untenable, and the Petitioner’s attempt to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is nothing but an endeavour to obstruct and derail a lawful investigation. It is therefore submitted that the Writ Petition, being devoid of substance, is not maintainable either in law or on facts, and deserves to be dismissed forthwith. 6. Be that as it may, when there is inaction on the part of the Respondent Police in registering the complaint as FIR, the Petitioner has got an alternative efficacious remedy of approaching the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate by way of filing complaint under Section 190 read with 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’/Section 210 read with 223 of ‘the BNSS’. 5 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Respondent Nos.3 & 4 not to henceforth interfere in the civil dispute pending in between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos.5 to 9, and liberty is given to the Petitioner to approach the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate by way of filing private complaint under Section 190 read with 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’/Section 210 read with 223 of ‘the BNSS’. 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: 08.04.2026 VTS