Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8815 (AP)

SHEIK MUBARAK v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/16839/2024 · 2026-08-30

Maheswara Rao Kuncheam

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010328592024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3504] MONDAY, THE 31st DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 16839/2024 Between: 1. SHEIK MUBARAK, S/O BASHEER MOHAMMAD AGED-50 YEARS, OCC- COOLIE WORK, R/O DOOR NO-7-79, DCCB COLONY, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. SHEIK SHABNAM BEGUM, S/O SHEIK MUBARAK, AGED- 31 YEARS, OCC- STUDENT, R/O DOOR NO- 7-79, DCCB COLONY, SRIKAKULAM TOWN, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM CITY, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. 3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, IV TOWN POLICE STATION (CRIME BRANCH), VISAKHAPATNAM CITY, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 tobe pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondent in insisting the petitioners by repeatedly making phone calls to appear before him and to confess in an alleged offence of theft of gold committed by some unknown persons, as illegal, irregular, irrational, without jurisdiction and 2 violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere in any manner with the personal life and liberty of petitioners otherwise than any known procedure established by law and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2024 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 2 and 3 not to insist the petitioners to appear before their authority nor interfere with petitioners’ personal liberty and life without following due process of law, pending disposal of main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. SRINIVAS AMBATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION No.16839 of 2024 The Court made the following O R D E R: Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this Writ Petition has become infructuous. 2. Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM, J Dated: 31.08.2026 BSM 4 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 16839/2024 BSM Dt: 31.08.2026