Dismissed¶34

P. Praveen v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Sept 2025WP/4602/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Police protection; writ of mandamus; Article 226; Articles 14 and 21; representations 18.12.2020 and 15.02.2021; interim injunction O.S.No.289/2018; PAWAN PALACE, Ashok Nagar, Tirupati; civil dispute; police cannot protect without judicial orders; dismissed for non-prosecution; liberty to approach competent Civil Court; no costs; pending applications closed; Dr Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa; 04.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; parties left at liberty to pursue their remedy before the competent Civil Court where the Civil Suit is pending; no order as to costs; pending applications closed. ¶34

P. Praveen Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

APHC010077502021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3396] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶5

WRIT PETITION No. 4602/2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

P. PRAVEEN, S/O.P.UMA MAHESWAR, AGED 34 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O.D.NO.18-2-268/16, SRI PAWAN PALACE, ASHOK NAGAR, LEELA MAHAL JUNCTION, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR.

¶11

SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE UPD, TIRUPATI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶12

STATION HOUSE OFFICER, EAST POLICE STATION, TIRUPATI.

¶13

SMT V SUSEELA, W/O. V. SIDDAIAH, AGED 53 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, R/O.13-2, TIRUCHANOOR ROAD, SRINIVASAPURAM, TIRUPATI.

¶14

V SIDDAIAH, S/O. NOT KNOWN, AGED 56 YEARS, OCC RETD CONSTABLE, R/O.13-2, TIRUCHANOOR ROAD, SRINIVASAPURAM, TIRUPATI.

¶15

V RAMANA, S/O. V. SIDDAIAH, AGED 34 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O.13-2, TIRUCHANOOR ROAD, SRINIVASAPURAM, TIRUPATI

¶16

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶17

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 to issue a Writ/Order/Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not providing police aid/protection pursuant to Representation dated 18.12.2020 and 15.02.2021 respectively based on injunction orders granted in O.S.No.289/2018 as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction besides violation of Arts.14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to provide police aid/protection

¶18

¶19

pursuant to Representation dated 18.12.2020 and 15.02.2021 respectively in respect of PAWAN PALACE, 18TH Ward, Ashok Nagar, Tirupati forthwith and to pass

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.SRINIVASULU KURRA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶23

1.GP FOR HOME

¶24

2.O UDAYA KUMAR

¶25

The Court made the following:

¶26

ORDER :

¶27

The instant Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief:

¶28

“....to issue a Writ/Order/Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in not providing police aid/protection pursuant to Representation dated 18.12.2020 and 15.02.2021 respectively based on injunction orders granted in O.S.No.289/2018 as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction besides violation of Arts.14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to provide police aid/protection pursuant to Representation dated 18.12.2020 and 15.02.2021 respectively in respect of PAWAN PALACE, 18TH Ward, Ashok Nagar, Tirupati forthwith and to pass ...”

¶29

None represented for the Petitioner.

¶30

Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent State and learned counsel appearing for unofficial respondents. Perused the material on record.

¶31

Learned counsel appearing for unofficial respondents would submit that Petitioner is seeking police protection in the light of the interim injunction granted by the competent Civil Court in favour of the Petitioner and the interim order is granted in this Writ Petition.

¶32

¶33

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on instructions would submit that since the subject matter relates to civil dispute, unless judicial orders are not obtained, respondent police cannot give any protection to the Petitioner and would submit that this Court may pass appropriate orders by disposing of this Writ Petition.

¶34

In the light of the submissions made, this Writ Petition is dismissed for Non-Prosecution. However, parties are at liberty to pursue their remedy before competent Civil Court where the Civil Suit is pending. No order as to costs.

¶35

Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶36

DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶37

Mjl/*

¶38

¶39

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶40

Writ Petition No. 4602 of 2021

¶41