APHC010148662026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] THURSDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 8583/2026 Between: 1.UDAYA KUMAR PILLA, S/O PILLA VIJAYA KRISHNA PATRUDU, AGED 45, R/O D.NO.44-27-34, FF-1, RK TOWERS, RAILWAY COLONY, BESIDE SIVALAYAM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 2.PILLA SIDDARDHA SAGAR,, S/O PILLA VIJAYA KRISHNA PATRUDU, AGED 42, R/O H.NO.2-9, PENDURTHI MANDAL, GURRAMPALEM VISAKHAPATNAM. 3.PILLA SIVA SAGAR,, S/O PILLA VIJAYA KRISHNA PATRUDU, AGED 39, R/O H.NO.2-9, PENDURTHI MANDAL, GURRAMPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 4.PILLA SURYANARAYANA PATRUDU,, S/O PILLA APPALANARASAYYA PATRUDU, AGED 74 R/O H.NO.2-30, PENDURTHI MANDAL, GURRAMPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5.PILLA PAPAYYA PATHRUDU,, S/O PILLA APPALA NARASAYYA PATRUDU, AGED 62, R/O H.NO.2-31, PENDURTHI MANDAL, GURRAMPALEM, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P. SECRETARIAT VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI-522238. 2.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, DGP OFFICE, MANGALAGIRI BYPASS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT- 2 522503. 3.THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT- 520002 4.THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, CENTRAL DIVISION, NTR POLICE COMMISSIONERATE, VIJAYAWADA-520002 5.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PATAMATA POLICE STATION, NTR DISTRICT- 520007 6.THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE CUM INVESTIGATING OFFICER, PATAMATA POLICE STATION, N.T.R DISTRICT-520007 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.P VIVEK 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 a direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent police in threatening and coercing the petitioners to lodge false criminal reports against proprietors of Blue Sea Ventures to whom we sold the lands previously under the guise investigation in Crime No 132 of 2025 of Patamata Police Station NTR District as illegal arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent police not to threaten or coerce the petitioners or other farmers and not disturb them in any manner under the guise of investigation in Crime No 132 of 2025 of Patamata police station NTR District and pass…” 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Sri Posani Venkateswarlu, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri P.Vivek, learned Counsel for the Petitioners, submits that the Petitioners 3 have been subjected to undue threat, intimidation, and coercion by the Respondent Police. It is contended that such coercive measures are being employed with a view to compelling the Petitioners to lodge fabricated and false criminal complaints against the proprietors of Blue Sea Ventures, to whom the Petitioners had earlier sold their lands, under the guise of investigation in Cr.No.132 of 2025 of Patamata Police Station. 4. Per contra, Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, vehemently refutes the allegations of coercion or intimidation attributed to the Respondent Police. The learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that, at no point of time, have the police authorities resorted to any coercive methods while conducting the investigation relating to the Petitioners. It is further stated that the Investigating Officer, strictly in consonance with law, issued notices as contemplated under Section 179 of ‘the BNSS’, calling upon the Petitioners to appear before him on 15.03.2026 for the purpose of recording their statements. 5. Be that as it may, it is trite law that while conducting investigation, the Investigating Officer is obligated to adhere scrupulously to the statutory framework governing criminal investigations. The recording of statements of witnesses is required to be undertaken strictly in accordance with Section 161 of ‘the Cr.P,.C.,’/Section 180 of ‘the BNSS’. In the course of examination, the Investigating Officer is empowered only to elicit information relevant to the investigation and germane to unfolding the facts connected with the offence under inquiry. The Investigating Officer is expected to confine himself to 4 recording statements relating to facts within the knowledge of the witnesses and is expressly proscribed from employing any form of pressure, inducement, threat, or coercion. 6. More particularly, the Investigating Officer cannot, under any circumstances, threaten or compel the Petitioners to foist false or concocted criminal proceedings against any individual, much less against the proprietors of Blue Sea Ventures, to whom the Petitioners are stated to have sold the lands previously. Any attempt to misuse the authority vested in the Investigating Officer under the pretext of conducting investigation in Crime No.132 of 2025 would be wholly impermissible. 7. Having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and recording the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the Investigating Officer not to coerce or compel the Petitioners to lodge complaints against the proprietors of Blue Sea Ventures. However, it is made clear that the Petitioners shall extend full cooperation to the Investigating Officer for the purpose of recording their statements. The Investigating Officer shall unfailingly follow the procedure prescribed under the provisions of ‘the BNSS’. The Petitioners are at liberty to be accompanied by their legal Counsel at the time their statements are recorded by the Investigating Officer. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J 5 Date: 09.04.2026 VTS