Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4597 (AP)

Gollapalli Srinivasa Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/17485/2026 · 2026-07-01

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Date of pronouncement: 02.07.2026 Date of uploading: APHC010325502026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] THURSDAY, THE 2nd DAY OF JULY 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 17485/2026 Between: 1. GOLLAPALLI SRINIVASA RAO, S/O G VENKATRAO, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS. 2. GOLLAPALLI NAGA LAKSHMI, W/O G.SRINIVASA RAO, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS. BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF D.NO.3-4-34, NEAR OLD SUGALI COLONY, SATTENAPALLI TOWN PALNADU DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT, . 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TOWN POLICE STATION, SATTENAPALLI, PALNADU DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 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 to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent and his police personnel in calling the petitioners to the police station and visiting the petitioners house and interfering with their personal life and liberty, without following the due process of law as illegal, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the BNS and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to harass the petitioners by calling them to the police station 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 to direct the 3rd respondent not to call the petitioners to the police station without issuing any notice, pending disposal of the writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. KOCHIRI RAJA SHEKAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 17485 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Instant Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief: “.... to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring the action of the 3rd respondent and his police personnel in calling the petitioners to the police station and visiting the petitioners house and interfering with their personal life and liberty, without following the due process of law as illegal, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of the BNS and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to harass the petitioners by calling them to the police station and pass such other order or orders …”. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners asserts that the petitioner No.1 has implicated in two criminal cases wherein he was released on bail, by due process of law. He submits that petitioner No.2 who is none other than the wife of petitioner No.1 filed OS No.448 of 2024 on the file of the Court the Principal Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sattenapalli arraying R.Venkata Rao and three others as defendants, seeking permanent injunction in respect of the subject property. He further contends 4 respondent/Police are calling the petitioners to the police station, without therebeing any legal cause. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on instructions submits that basing on the complaint of one Mandava Srinivasa Rao of Gandluru Village, Sattenapalli Mandal, Palnadu District, the police called the petitioners only for the purpose of preliminary enquiry. Except that, they are not harassing the petitioners, as contended by learned counsel for the petitioners. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of both the parties, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent/police not to call the petitioners to the police station, without any legal cause. No costs. 6. Needless to state that any retraction to the above direction will be viewed seriously. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 02.07.2026 PSA Whether the Order is: Speaking ✔ Reasoned Reportable Non-reportable ✔ 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 17485 of 2026 Date: 02.07.2026 PSA