Kalangi Nageswara Rao Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV^^SH^
(Special Original Jurisdiction) ^

¶2

FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 3005 OF 2025

¶6

Between:

¶7

Kalangi Nageswara Rao, S/o Seetharamaiah, aged about 56 years, R/o D.No. 4-116, Nekarikallu Village and Mandal Palnadu District

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by the Principal Secretary, Department of Home affairs. Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶11

The Director General of Police, Police Head Quarters, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.

¶12

The Superintendent of Police, Palnadu District, Narasaraopet

¶13

The Deputy Superintndent of Police, Narasaraopet,^{PalnaduDistrict}

¶14

The Station House Officer, Nakarekallu Police Station, Nakarekallu, Palnadu district

¶15

V. Koti Lingaiah, S/o not known to the petitioner. Manager of Suphalitha Chit Fund, Opposite ICICI Bank, Narasaraopet, Palnadu^District

¶16

V. Venkaiah, S/o not known to the petitioner. Manager^{ofShriramChits} Pvt Fund, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District

¶17

Palem Srinivasa Reddy, S/o Narasimha Reddy, R/o Reddypalem Village, Rompicherla Mandal, Palnadu District

¶18

Puli Nagi Reddy, S/o Chenna Reddy, R/o Machavaram Village, Rompicherla Mandal, Palnadu District

¶19

/

¶20

to* Bonamukkala Narayana Reddy, S/o Chinnapa Reddy, R/o Na^ingapadu, Nakarikallu Mandal, Palnadu District 11BhSvanasi Rambabu, S/o Guravaiah R/o Challagundia Village Nakarikallu Mandal, Palnadu District 12. Kunisetty Srinivasa Rao, S/o knot known to the petitioner, R/o Arundelpet, Narasaraopet, Palnadu District

¶21

...RESPONDENTS

¶22

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the respondent Nos4 and 5 cannot interfere in any civil disputes between the citizens and cannot take on themselves the function of a civil court at the instance of unofficial respondents and threatening the petitioner to settle the money dispute being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from being violative of Principles of Natural Justice.

¶23

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶24

Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 not to interfere with the life and liberty of the petitioner by way of calling the petitioner to the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 pending disposal of the main writ petition.

¶25

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VENKATA DURGA RAO ANANTHA

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5: GP FOR HOME

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 6 to 12:

¶28

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶29

APHC010049052025

¶30

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶31

[3368]

¶32

FRIDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶33

PRESENT

¶34

the honourable SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO: 3005/2025

¶36

Between:

¶37

Kalangi Nageswara Rao

¶38

...PETITIONER

¶39

AND

¶40

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶41

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶42

1 .VENKATA DURGA RAO ANANTHA

¶43

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶44

1.GP FOR HOME

¶45

The Court made the following order:

¶46

This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution^of India is filed for the following relief:

¶47

"to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly^onein the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring that the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 cannot interfere in any civil disputes between the citizens and cannot take on themselves^the function of a civil court at the instance of unofficial

¶48

2

¶49

respondents and threatening the petitioner to settie the money dispute being iiiegai arbitrary and vioiative of Articies 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from being 1 vioiative ofPrinci^es bf Naturai Justice and pass such..."

¶50

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State.

¶51

Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for^the State on written instructions would submit that as per the preliminary enquiry of the Police, it is a civil dispute^betweenthe petitioner and the unofficial respondent No.6 and they will not interfere with the civil dispute between the parties^and all the other allegations made in the affidavit are not true and correct.

¶52

Submissions made by learned Assistant Government Pleader are placed on record.

¶53

In that view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Writ Petition can be closed at the stage of admission itself, without going into merits of the case, by directing the respondent/Police to follow due procedure established^under law, if they intend to call the petitioner to the Police Station, in connection with any crime or enquiry.

¶54

3

¶55