Disposed¶30

Gangisetti Thulasamma v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC10 Sept 2025WP/5639/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Art. 226 writ petition disposed; prayer for mandamus to register complaint dt. 20.01.2020 against respondent 5 refused; AGP submission — dispute purely civil in nature; petitioner granted liberty to pursue remedies before appropriate forum; no costs; misc petitions closed; parties: Gangisetti Thulasamma v. State of A.P. & police officials & Chakala Lakshmi Devi; Madanapalle/Chittoor; W.P.No.5639 of 2020; decided 11.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner at liberty to work out her remedies before the appropriate forum in accordance with law; no order as to costs. ¶30

Gangisetti Thulasamma Vs The State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner at liberty to work out her remedies before the appropriate forum in accordance with law; no order as to costs.

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondents 2 to 4 in not registering the complaint made by the petitioner dated 20.01.2020 against respondent No.5 was illegal and arbitrary, and whether a Writ of Mandamus should issue directing them to register the complaint as per its contents. +1 more

¶24

Court's answer

The mandamus sought (a direction to register the complaint dated 20.01.2020) was not granted; the writ petition was disposed of, with the petitioner left at liberty to work out her remedies before the appropriate forum in accordance with law, and with no order as to costs.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

The disposal rested on the submissions placed before the Court — notably the Assistant Government Pleader's submission that the disputes between the parties are purely civil in nature ('In that view').

¶30

Key takeaways

As a sequel to the disposal, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.obiter¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court (Single Judge, Dr Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 by Gangisetti Thulasamma seeking a Writ of Mandamus to compel respondents 2 to 4 (SP, Chittoor; DSP, Madanapalle; SHO, II Town Police Station, Madanapalle) to register her complaint dated 20.01.2020 against respondent No.5 (Chakala Lakshmi Devi), alleging the non-registration was illegal and arbitrary. The Assistant Government Pleader for Home (Md.Farooq) submitted that the disputes between the parties are purely civil in nature; counsel for the petitioner sought appropriate orders. Holding 'In that view', the Court disposed of the writ petition without issuing the mandamus, granting the petitioner liberty to work out her remedies before the appropriate forum in accordance with law; there was no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, stood closed.

¶1

[3396]

¶2

APHC010094092020

¶3

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

¶4

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

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 5639/2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

GANGISETTI THULASAMMA, W/O. VENKATASWAMY, HINDU, AGE 54 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEWIFE, R/O. VEMPALLE VILLAGE AND POST, MADANAPALLE MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

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

¶11

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶12

DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MADANAPALLE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶13

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, II TOWN POLICE STATION, MADANAPALLE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶14

CHAKALA LAKSHMI DEVI, W/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED 48 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.4-4-3-4, MARUPURI STREET, MADANAPALLE TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶17

1.K SRINIVAS

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶19

1.GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶20

The Court made the following:

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with

¶23

the following prayer for:

¶24

“.... a issue an appropriate writ, or order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 2 to 4 in not registering the complaint made by the petitioner dated 20.01.2020 against the 5th respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents 2 to 4 to

¶25

¶26

register the complaint against the respondent No.5 as per the contents of the complaint dated 20.01.2020 made by the petitioner .”

¶27

Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would

¶28

submit that the disputes between the parties are purely civil in nature.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders.

¶30

In that view, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to work out her remedies before appropriate forum in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶31

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

¶32

________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶33

Date:11.09.2025 ASR

¶34

¶35

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶36

W.P.No.5639 of 2020

¶37