APHC010184312026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] FRIDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 10094/2026 Between: 1. K ANJANEYULU, S/O. SWAMIDASU, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE R/O. VIDHYA NAGAR, BADVEL TOWN AND MANDAL, Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT. 2. K.KOTESWARI,, W/O. K.ANJANEYULU.AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.7-2-1/4, SIDDAVATAM ROAD, BADVEL, CHENNAMPALLE REVENUE VILLAGE, BADVEL MANDAL,Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 522237 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADAPA, Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT. 516001 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MYDUKUR, Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT. 516172 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE OF BADVEL URBAN POLICE STATION, BADVEL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.516227 5. THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, BADVEL URBAN POLICE STATION, BADVEL, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT.516227 6. ASHOK, S/O. NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER. AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,R/O. NEAR RTC BUS-STAND, BADVEL TOWN AND 2 MANDAL,Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT. 516227 7. N SIRISHA, W/O. ASHOK,AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O. NEAR RTC BUS-STAND, BADVEL TOWN AND MANDAL, Y.S.R KADAPA DISTRICT. 516227 ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. V R REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief: “…to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of respondent No.4 in registering FIR based on the complaint, dated 02.03.2026 as arbitrary, illegal, contrary to the well-established legal principles, apart from being violative of the fundamental and Constitutional rights guaranteed to us under Articles 14, 19, 21 and 300- A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.4 to register FIR and take action in accordance with law against respondents No.6 and 7 and pass…” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader. 3. Mr. V. R. Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioners have submitted a complaint dated 02.03.2026, but no case has been registered nor has any investigation been conducted. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that respondent No. 7 has submitted a complaint against the petitioners, which was registered as a case in Cr. No. 26 of 2026, and investigation is going on. It is further submitted that the petitioners have 3 submitted a complaint in PGRS dated 02.03.2026, and the respondent has issued an endorsement stating that the petitioners did not appear for enquiry; therefore, an endorsement was passed on 10.03.2026 stating that a case has been lodged against the petitioners for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 324(4), 115(2), 351(2), and 79 read with 3(5) of the BNSS in Cr. No. 26 of 2026 of Badvel Urban Police Station. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the day of the preliminary enquiry conducted based on the PGRS complaint submitted by the petitioners, petitioner No.1 was suffering from heart and lung problems, and therefore, he could not attend the preliminary enquiry. It is submitted that if one more opportunity is given to attend the preliminary enquiry to be conducted by respondent No. 5, the interest of justice would be served. The request of the learned counsel for the petitioners appears to be convincing and reasonable. If one more opportunity is given to the petitioners to participate in the preliminary enquiry on the PGRS complaint submitted by them, the ends of justice would be served. 6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, and recording the submissions of both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent Nos. 2 to 5 to conduct a preliminary enquiry on the PGRS complaint submitted by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders and take action in accordance with law within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 4 7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ________________________ Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 17.04.2026 SSA 5 153 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 10094 of 2026 Date: 17.04.2026 SSA 6