Disposed

Mallanathina Krishna Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC22 Aug 2022WP/21806/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Writ Petition challenging police interference in a civil land dispute, the court recorded the respondent's submission that officials did not intervene and the petitioner's wife avoided police notice for a criminal case suit. The court closed the petition as the core allegation of interference was denied.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is closed as the allegation of police interference is denied.

Mallanathina Krishna Reddy Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

CMR, J. W.P.No.21806 of 2022

¶3

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶4

Writ Petition No.21806 of 2022

¶5

ORDER:

¶6

This Writ Petition for a mandamus is filed to declare the action of the 3^rd respondent in interfering in the civil dispute relating to the lands covered by Survey No.433-1 in an extent of Ac.0.33 cents and Survey No.433-2 in an extent of Ac.0.27 cents of Chillakur village and Mandal, Tirupati District, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, sought direction to the respondents not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of the said lands and not to interfere in the civil dispute.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents 1 to 3.

¶8

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that the wife of the petitioner was involved in a case in Crime No.26 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447 and 427 of IPC for demolishing the mechanic shed run by a muslim person and when the police made an effort to serve a notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. that she has been avoiding the same. Suppressing the said fact, the petitioner herein has filed this Writ Petition with false allegations. He would also submit that the respondent police officials never interfered in any such civil dispute relating to the above lands or with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of the said lands. He would submit that the allegation made to that effect in the writ petition is false.

¶9

¶10

CMR, J. W.P.No.21806 of 2022

¶11

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has also placed on record the written instructions received by him to that effect from the 3^rd respondent Station House Officer, Chillakur Police Station, Tirupati District.

¶12

Therefore, recording the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, that the police officials are not interfering in any such civil dispute or with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of the aforesaid lands, the Writ Petition is closed. However, as regards the crime that was registered against the wife of the petitioner, as alleged supra, the law has to take its own course. No costs.

¶13

Consequently, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall also stand closed.

¶14

________________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶15

Date:22.08.2022. cs

Mallanathina Krishna Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mallanathina Krishna Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rami Reddy Chinna Narasimha Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K M Umar Farooq Khan Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Thota Ramakrishna, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Thalari Ampaiah Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

Golla Peda Muneppa, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Sangati Venkata Ravindra Reddy at Potti Ravi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh