Disposed¶36

Borra Dasthagiri v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC12 Nov 2025WP/938/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP HC Amaravati, W.P. No. 938/2022, decided 13.11.2025 by Dr. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa; police non-interference in civil dispute; Borra Dasthagiri and others v. State of A.P. (Home Dept.) and others incl. Chipilla Venkat; Article 226; Article 21; direction to police not to interfere except under due process of law; disposed.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of; Police directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the Petitioners and Respondent No.5 except under due process of law; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ¶36

Borra Dasthagiri Vs State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2025)

¶1

[3396]

¶2

APHC010008862022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER

¶6

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO: 938/2022

¶10

Between:

¶11

BORRA DASTHAGIRI, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O. KRISHNA, R/O.D.NO.1-88, BOSEBOMMA CENTER, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶12

KRISHNA, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. SRIRAM MURTHY, R/O.D.NO.188, BOSEBOMMA CENTER, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶13

YEMENANI HUSSAINE AMMA,, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O. SHERATH CHANDRA SRINIVAS, R/O.D.NO.1-88, BOSEBOMMA CENTER, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶14

THANGETI GANGADHAR, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. RAMANA, R/O.D.NO.1-88, BOSEBOMMA CENTER, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶15

...PETITIONER(S)

¶16

AND

¶17

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, HOME DEPARTMENT, REP BY ITS PRINCIPALSECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶18

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR, GUTUR DISTRICT.

¶19

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶20

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TADEPALLI P.S, TADEPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶21

CHIPILLA VENKAT, TATA MAMMA HIGH SCHOOL ROAD CHITTI NAGAR VIJAYAWADA KRISHNA DISTRICT

¶22

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶24

1.K KOUTILYA

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶26

1.GP FOR HOME

¶27

The Court made the following:

¶28

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

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

¶31

“.... a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 3 and 4 in interfering with the Civil disputes, giving threatening calls to the Petitioners at the instance of the 5th Respondents illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to Article 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents 3 and 4, not to interfere in the civil disputes between the Petitioners and the 5th Respondent.”

¶32

2. Sri K.Koutilya, learned counsel for the Petitioners would submit that, let

¶33

there be a direction to the Police not to interfere in the civil disputes between the Petitioners and the unofficial Respondent.

¶34

3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would

¶35

submit that the Police are not interfering in the civil disputes between the parties.

¶36

4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶37

However, Police are directed not to interfere in the civil disputes between the Petitioners and Respondent No.5, except under due process of law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶38

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

¶39

________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶40

Date:13.11.2025 Dinesh

¶41

¶42

HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

¶43

W.P.No.938 of 2022

¶44

Dt.13.11.2025

¶45

Dinesh

Borra Dasthagiri v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Borra Dasthagiri v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Botla Raghupathi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

K.v.Krishna Reddy, Vs The State of A.P

Hanskumar Jain Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

L Radhika Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Bokka Venkata Ramadevi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M/S. Spay Technology Pvt. Ltd., Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh