APHC010712122025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE 25th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 36532 OF 2025 Between: 1. Smt. Mudiyam Jhansi Rani,, W/o. Mudiyam Subrahmanyam Aged about 34 Years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. H. No. 3-25, Society Street, Jeelugumilli Village and Mandal, Eluru District. 2. Smt. Mudiyam Satyavathi,, W/o. Mudiyam Tirupathi Rao Aged about 69 Years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. H. No. 3-25, Society Street, Jeelugumilli Village, and Mandal, Eluru District. 3. Sri Mudiyam Subrahmanyam,, S/o. Mudiyam Tirupathi Rao Aged about 45 Years, Occ Agriculture, R/o. H. No. 3-25, Society Street, Jeelugumilli Village and Mandal, Eluru District. ...Petitioners AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, , Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, at Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District. A.P.- 522237. 2 2. The District Collector, At Eluru, Eluru District, A.P.- 534006 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Jangareddigudem, Eluru District, A.P-534456 4. The Tahsildar, Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District., A.P. - 534456 5. The Superintendent of Police, At Eluru, Eluru District., A.P., 534006 6. The Station House Officer, Jeelugumilli Police Station, Eluru District, A.P- 534456. 7. Sri Tellam Joga Rao, S/o. Late Arjuna Rao, Aged 27 Years, R/o. Chandramma Colony, Jeelugumilli Village and Mandal, Eluru District, A.P- 534456. 8. Smt Tellam Prameela, W/o. Joga Rao, Aged 24 Years, R/o. Chandramma Colony, Jeelugumilli Village and Mandal, Eluru District, A.P.-534456 9. Smt Chirri Venkatamma, W/o. Late Lakshmana Swamy, Aged 46 Years, R/o. Chandramma Colony, Jeelugumilli Village and Mandal, Eluru District, A.P.-534456 10. Smt Soyam Kalyani, W/o. Soyam Lakshmana Rao, Aged 29 Years, R/o. Chandramma Colony, Jeelugumilli Village and Mandal, Eluru District, A.P.-534456 3 11. Smt Potta Jagadamba, W/o. Potta Ganesh, Aged 22 Years, R/o. Chandramma Colony, Jeelugumilli Village and Mandal, Eluru District, A.P.-534456 12. Sri Potta Ganesh, S/o. Sankaram, Aged 36 Years, R/o. Sirrivari Gudem Village, Jeelugumilli Mandal, Eluru District, A.P.- 534456 ...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 tomay be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the in action of the Respondent No.2 to 6 herein in not taking any action on the Representation of the petitioners dated 14.12.2025 followed by personal visits, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against the principles of natural justice and also violation of Article 14,19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India. Consequently, direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 herein to act upon the representation dt. 14.08.2025 and to take action against the Respondent Nos. 7 to 12 accordance with law and to pass such 4 IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property to an extent of Ac. 1.40 cents in Sy. No. 149/IB, situated at Jeelugumilli Revenue Village and Mandal, Eluru District by protecting the life and liberty of the petitioners herein by following due process of law, pending disposal of the main writ petition, and pass such Counsel for the Petitioners: BABUJI TENNETI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 36532 of 2025 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 of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the in action of the Respondent No.2 to 6 herein in not taking any action on the Representation of the petitioners dated 14.12.2025 followed by personal visits, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against the principles of natural justice and also violation of Article 14,19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India. Consequently, direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 herein to act upon the representation dt. 14.08.2025 and to take action against the Respondent Nos. 7 to 12 accordance with law and to pass”. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of Respondent/State and perused the material placed available on record. 3. Conspectus of facts in the present Writ Petition is that, despite the petitioners’ complaint to the police personnel, the 6 respondent police are not acting upon the same by registering an FIR, thereby lodging criminal proceedings. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, basing on the written instructions of the Respondent/Police, submits that preliminary enquiry of the police reveals that the petitioners’ complaint does not disclose commission of any cognizable offence. As such, Writ Petition itself is not maintainable. 5. Now, coming to the central issue in the lis, despite the petitioners’ complaint, the police are not registering an FIR; the aggrieved party directly initiating proceedings before the Hon’ble High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India or Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 6. In this juncture, it is appropriate to note that the issue involved in the present lis, is squarely covered by the Order of this Court dated 23.07.2026 in WP No.18425 of 2026, wherein this Court appreciated the facts and law by taking into consideration of the dictums laid down by the Apex Court including latest expression held in Sujal Vishwas Attavar and 7 another vs. State of Maharashtra and others1, wherein it was held as under: “7. Keeping in view the above exposition of law, we find that the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ought not to have been invoked when alternative equally efficacious statutory remedies were available. If a person has a grievance that his FIR has not been registered by the police, or having been registered, proper investigation is not being conducted, then the remedy does not ordinarily lie in invoking the writ jurisdiction in the first instance, but in seeking recourse to the statutory framework, unless of course the urgency of the circumstances warrant otherwise. 8. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (erstwhile Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) provides a structured sequential mechanism for initiating criminal prosecution. The statutory framework contemplates that information relating to the commission of a cognizable offence is first placed before the officer-in-charge of the police station and an FIR is registered under Section 173(1) BNSS. In the event of refusal to register the FIR, recourse lies before the jurisdictional Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS and, thereafter, before the Magistrate, under Section 175(3) BNSS. 9. xxxx. 10. xxxx. 1 2026 SCC OnLine SC 798 8 11. The High Court is not bound to entertain a writ petition merely because a case of alleged inaction or negligence is made out against a statutory authority. Ordinarily, where a statute provides a complete and efficacious remedy, the same must be exhausted before invoking constitutional jurisdiction [See: Sakiri Vasu (supra) and Sudhir Bhaskarrao Tambe (supra)]. In the present facts, the complainant Company has not exhausted the sequential statutory remedies available under BNSS. There is, therefore, no foundation to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court for the reason that efficacious and efficient alternative remedies exists. Hence, at this stage, we find the instant writ petition to be premature, and, therefore, not fit to be entertained.” 7. Accordingly, by applying the above ratio to the present case too, this Writ Petition is disposed of as under: i) Liberty is granted to the petitioners to approach the learned jurisdictional Magistrate by filing appropriate complaint under Section 175(3) and 210 read with 223 of BNSS, 2023. ii) This Court has not expressed any opinion on merits and whether or not the complaint discloses criminal offences. 9 iii) Equally, it will be open to all the stakeholders to avail remedies in terms of the statutory realm.” There shall be no order as to costs. 8. Registry is directed to append a copy of the Order of this Court dated 23.07.2026 in WP No.18425 of 2026 along with the instant order. Interlocutory applications, if any, pending shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM Date: 25.08.2026 PSA 10 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 36532 of 2025 Date: 25.08.2026 PSA