APHC010405982026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 5th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 21780 OF 2026 Between: 1. NAGINENI ESWARAMMA, W/o. Sankaraiah, Aged about 57 years, Occ Cultivation, R/o. Lebakuvaripalli Village, Pullampeta Mandal, Tirupati District - 516107. ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 522238 2. The Superintendent of Police, Tirupati District. 517501 3. The Circle Inspector of Police, Railwaykodur Rural Circle, Railwaykodur, Tirupati District. 516101 4. The Station House Officer, Pullampeta Police Station, Pullampeta Mandal, Tirupati District. 516107 ...Respondents 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 toissue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents, particularly the 4th respondent, in conducting custodial interrogation of Sri Nagineni Sankaraiah (A-1) and Sri Nagineni Koteswara Rao (A-2) in Crime No.58 of 2026 of Pullampeta Police Station without permitting the presence of their Advocate at a visible distance but beyond hearing range as illegal, 2 arbitrary, unconstitutional, violative of Articles 20(3), 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and consequently direct the respondents to permit their Advocate to remain present during custodial interrogation at a visible p1 distance but beyond hearing range, 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 direct the respondents to permit the Advocate engaged by Sri Nagineni Sankaraiah (A-1) and Sri Nagineni Koteswara Rao (A-2) to remain present during the entire period of police custody/interrogation at a visible distance but beyond hearing range Counsel for the Petitioner: GADE NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.21780 of 2026 The Court made the following Order: Instant Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “to Issue a Writ, or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, particularly the 4th respondent, in conducting custodial interrogation of Sri Nagineni Sankaraiah (A-1) and Sri Nagineni Koteswara Rao (A-2) in Crime No.58 of 2026 of Pullampeta Police Station without permitting the presence of their Advocate at a visible distance but beyond hearing range as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violative of Articles 20(3), 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the law declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and consequently direct the respondents to permit their Advocate to remain present during custodial interrogation at a visible distance but beyond hearing range, and pass”. 2. Brief case of the present writ petition is that learned counsel for the petitioner moved house motion on 02.08.2026, wherein this Court passed the following order: “I.A.No.1 of 2026 The instant Writ Petition moved by way of "House Motion" as per the procedure prescribed, thus came before this Court on 02.08.2026 at 5.00 p.m. Heard Mr. Katari Kishore Kumar, learned counsel, representing Mr. Gade Nageswara Rao, learned counsel the Petitioner as well as Mrs. A. Jayanthi, learned Government Pleader for Home for the State. 4 Learned counsel for the Petitioner reiterated his pleadings in the Writ Affidavit and emphasized the constitutional rights of the Accused in the custodial interrogation. He further states that despite specific observations made by the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nandalur, vide order, dated 31.07.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.335 of 2026 in Crime No.58 of 2026 of Pullampet Police Station, the Respondent/ Police not permitted the Advocate to be present at the interrogation process distantly too. Thus, he prays for interim direction to that extent only. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader states that the Police strictly adhering the orders passed by the learned Magistrate, dated 31.07.2026. Considering the constitutional principles enunciated under Articles 20(3), 21 of the Constitution of India, coupled with authoritative legal dictums in D.K.Basu v. State of West Bengal 1and also very recent decision of the Apex Court in the State of Andhra Pradesh v. Suda Suresh Veera Venkata Naga Raju2, this Court is inclined to pass the following interim order. a) Directing the Respondents/ Police Authorities to permit the Advocate to observe the interrogation process distantly (in visible distance) but at any cost, the said Advocate shall not interfere with the Police interrogation process. b) It is made clear that the Investigating Officer shall have unrestricted access to the Accused during period of Police custody for the purpose of interrogation. c) Added to that all the observations and conditions imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Nandalur, vide order dated 31.07.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.335 of 2026 in Crime No.58 of 2026 of Pullampet Police Station shall continue. List the matter on 05.08.2026 in Adjourned Motion List. Learned Government Pleader for Home is directed to communicate the instant order to the Respondent/Police forthwith.” 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, learned counsel for the petitioner asserts that the police custody commencing from 10:00 hours on 02.08.2026 to 15:00 hours on 1 (1997) 1 SCC 416 2 2026 INSC 744 5 04.08.2026 has been completed and fairly states that the police complied with the orders of this Court dated 02.08.2026 by permitting the Advocate to be present at the time of interrogation process. Hence, as the grievance of the petitioner has already been redressed, no further orders are required to be passed in the present matter for further adjudication. 4. Recording the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is closed. No costs. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 05.08.2026 KRK 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM 127 WRIT PETITION NO: 21780 of 2026 Date: 05.08.2026 KRK