Disposed¶31

Pogiri Rama krishna Naidu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Nov 2025WP/5259/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

W.P.No.5259 of 2022; Pogiri Rama Krishna Naidu v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others; High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati; disposed 05.11.2025; Dr Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa; police interference in civil dispute OS.No.24/2016 (Senior Civil Judge, Rajam, Srikakulam); Santhakaviti Police Station; Crime No.148 of 2021; Sections 447 and 379 read with 34 IPC; harassment by calling to police station; mandamus; due process of law; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of recording the Assistant Government Pleader for Home's submission; police directed to follow due process of law regarding Crime No.148 of 2021 registered against the petitioner; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed. ¶31

Pogiri Rama krishna Naidu Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of Respondents No.3 and 4 (Station House Officer and Assistant Sub-Inspector, Santhakaviti Police Station) in interfering in the petitioner's civil dispute in OS.No.24/2016 over his schedule agricultural lands, at the instance/collusion of Respondents No.6 to 9, without any jurisdiction, is illegal and arbitrary. +1 more

¶26

Court's answer

The police were directed to follow due process of law regarding the crime registered against the petitioner; no order as to costs was made.

¶31

Ratio / Principle

The Court recorded the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home (that Crime No.148 of 2021 had been registered against the petitioner under Sections 447 and 379 read with 34 IPC) and disposed of the Writ Petition on that basis.

¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati (Dr Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa), W.P.No.5259 of 2022, disposed of on 05.11.2025. The petitioner, Pogiri Rama Krishna Naidu, sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 to restrain Respondents 3 and 4 (SHO and ASI, Santhakaviti Police Station, Srikakulam District) from interfering in his civil suit OS.No.24/2016 (Senior Civil Judge, Rajam) over scheduled agricultural land at Seetarampuram and S.Rangarayapuram villages and from harassing him at the instance of Respondents 6 to 9, alleging violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300A. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted on written instructions that, on the complaint of an unofficial respondent, Crime No.148 of 2021 had been registered against the petitioner at Santhakaviti Police Station for offences under Sections 447 and 379 read with Section 34 IPC. Recording that submission, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition, directing the police to follow due process of law regarding the registered crime, without ordering costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stood closed.

¶1

APHC010078472022

¶2

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

¶3

[3396]

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 5259/2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

POGIRI RAMA KRISHNA NAIDU, S/O LATE APPALANAIDU AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O S.RANGARAYAPURAM VILLAGE, SANTHAKAVITI MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

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

¶12

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SRIKAKULAM SRIKAKULAM. DISTRICT

¶13

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SANTHAKAVITI POLICE STATION SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT

¶14

THE ASSISTANT SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, SANTHAKAVITI POLICE STATION SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT

¶15

ARASADA RAJAMOHAN, AGE 32 YEARS OCC. VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, G.S.PURAM VILLAGE/POST SANTHAKAVITI MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT

¶16

KURITI SRINIVAS RAO, AGE 45 YEARS OCC. DY DIRECTOR, CHIEF PLANNING OFFICE,COLLECTOR OFFICE, VIZIANAGARAM VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT.

¶17

POGIRI RAJASEKHAR NAIDU, S/O SATYAM NAIDU AGE 31 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE S.RANGARAYAPURAM VILLAGE,G.S.PURAM POST SANTHAKAVITI MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT

¶18

POGIRI SATYAM NAIDU, S/O LATE SURAPU NAIDU @ SURAYYA AGE 62 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE S.RANGARAYAPURAM VILLAGE,G.S.PURAM POST SANTHAKAVITI MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT

¶19

POGIRI SRIRAMULU NAIDU, S/O LATE SURAPU NAIDU @ SURAYYA AGE 52 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE S.RANGARAYAPURAM VILLAGE,G.S.PURAM POST SANTHAKAVITI MANDAL SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S):

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.TOTA TEJESWARA RAO

¶22

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME The Court made the following:

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for:

¶26

“.... to issue a writ order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of Respondents No.3 and 4 in interfering in the civil disputes in OS.NO.24/2016 in the Petitioners schedule land For an extent of Ac.O-96 cents in sy.No.250 ,for an extent Ac 1.00 cents in sy.no.151-3 for an extent of Ac.0.87 cents Sy.no.151-3 ,for an extent of Ac.2-76 cents covered by Sy.no.152-7 ,for an extent of Ac.0.25 cents and for an Extent of Ac 0.50 cents in sy No.227-26 at seetarampuram and S.Rangarayapuram villages santakaviti Mandal Srikakulam district and harassing the petitioner by calling to the police station with collusion of the Respondent No.6 to 9 without any jurisdiction is illegal, arbitrary and violation of the Art.14,21 and 300(A) Of the Constitution of India and also violation of the principles of natural Justice Consequently direct the Respondents No.3 and 4 not to interfere in the Petitioner schedule land For an extent of Ac.0-96 cents in sy.No.250 ,for an extent Ac 1.00 cents in sy.no.151- 3 for an extent of Ac.0.87 cents Sy.no.151-3 ,for an extent of Ac.2-76 cents covered by Sy.no.152-7 ,for an extent of Ac.0.25 cents and for an Extent of Ac 0.50 cents in sy No.227-26 at seetarampuram and S.Rangarayapuram villages santakaviti mandal Srikakulam district pending disposal of civil suit in OS.N0.24/2016 on the file of Senior civil judge at Rajam Srikakulam District .”

¶27

Heard Sri T.Tejeswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

¶28

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that basing on the complaint of the unofficial respondent, the police have registered a case against the petitioner in Crime No.148 of 2021 of Santhakviti Police Station, for

¶29

¶30

the offences punishable under Sections 447 and 379 read with 34 IPC.

¶31

Recording the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed to follow due process of law regarding the crime registered against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶32

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶33

_______________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶34

Date:05.11.2025 ASR

¶35

¶36

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶37

W.P.No.5259 of 2022

¶38