Thota Srinu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Thota Srinu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None in substance; the writ petition was disposed of without further orders on the basis of the respondents' written instructions confirming non-interference in the civil dispute; the written instructions were directed to form part of the record and no order as to costs was made.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of Respondents 3 and 4 (police) in summoning the petitioners (son and mother) to Inavolu Police Station, making them sit from morning to evening, abusing, harassing and threatening them, directing them to vacate their residential house site in Sy.No.114 and not allowing them to cut their eucalyptus trees in Sy.No.160, constitutes illegal interference in a civil dispute warranting a writ of mandamus.

Court's answer

Since the police authorities are not interfering in the civil dispute between the parties, no further orders are required in the present writ petition.

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition stands disposed of; the written instructions furnished by the respondents form part of the record; there is no order as to costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), A. Hari Haranadha Sarma, J. — W.P. No. 15146 of 2026, disposed of on 04.06.2026. Petitioners Thota Srinu (son) and Thota Ravanamma (mother), cultivators of Pamidipadu Village, Nuzendia Mandal, Palnadu District, invoked Article 226 alleging that Respondents 3 (Station House Officer, Inavolu PS) and 4 (Sub-Inspector S. Krishna Rao) called them to the police station and made them sit from morning to evening, abused, harassed and threatened them, directed them to vacate a residential house site admeasuring 3 cents in Sy.No.114 near Sivalayam, and did not allow them to cut eucalyptus trees from agricultural land in Sy.No.160 (LPM No.1077, Ac.6-50 cents), allegedly at the instance of local politicians in power; IA No.1 of 2026 under Section 151 CPC sought a direction not to harass them. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, reported that a complaint by one Sri Bathula Bramaiah was enquired into, that a civil dispute was found to exist, that Respondent 3 advised the parties to settle the matter before the competent Civil Court, and that police would not interfere in civil disputes. Holding that the police authorities were not interfering in the civil dispute, the Court found no further orders necessary and disposed of the writ petition, directing that the written instructions form part of the record; pending miscellaneous petitions and any interim order stood closed as a sequel; no order as to costs.

APHC010288492026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

[3520]

THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA WRIT PETITION NO: 15146/2026

Between:

THOTA SRINU, S/O. LATE MUNAIAH, AGE 37 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O.1-110, PAMIDIPADU VILLAGE, NUZENDIA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT- 522 660.

THOTA RAVANAMMA,, W/O. LATE MUNAIAH, AGE 64 YEARS, OCC CULTIVATION, R/O.1-110, PAMIDIPADU VILLAGE, NUZENDIA MANDAL PALNADU DISTRICT - 522 660.

...PETITIONER(S)

AND

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522 237.

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALNADU DISTRICT, NARASARAOPET - 522 601.

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, INAVOLU PS, NUZENDIA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT - 522 237.

SRI S KRISHNA RAO, S/O. NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT MAJOR, SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, INAVOLU PS, NUZENDIA MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT - 522237.

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 topleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the illegal action on the part of the 3rd and 4th respondents in calling the petitioners (Son and Mother) to the 3rd respondent Police Station, making the petitioners to sit in the station from morning to evening, abusing, harassing and threatening the petitioners directing them to vacate from their residential house site admeasuring 3 cent in Sy.No.114 cents situated near Sivalayam in Pamidipadu Village, Nuzendia Mandal of Palnadu District and further not allowing the petitioners to cut their eucalyptus trees from their agricultural land in Sy.No.160 (LPM No. 1077) Ac.6-50 cents situated at Pamidipadu Village, Nuzendia Mandal of Palnadu District only at the instance of the local politicians who are in power ., as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 not to harass the petitioners by calling them to the station and making them to sit in the station from morning to evening., and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondents 3 & 4 not to harass the petitioners by interfering into civil disputes, by calling them to the station and making them to sit in the station from morning to evening, to settle the issues with the local politicians over the subject residential house site admeasuring 3 >2 cent in Sy.No.114 cents and the land in Sy.No.160 (LPM No.1077) Ac.6-50 cents situated at Pamidipadu Village, Nuzendia Mandal of Palnadu District and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

1.G VENKATA REDDY

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR HOME

The Court made the following the order:-

The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief:

“…pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the illegal action on the part of the 3rd and 4th respondents in calling the petitioners Son and Mother to the 3rd respondent Police Station making the petitioners to sit in the station from morning to evening abusing harassing and threatening the petitioners directing them to vacate from their residential house site admeasuring 3 cent in Sy No 114 cents situated near Sivalayam in Pamidipadu Village Nuzendia Mandal of Palnadu District and further not allowing the petitioners to cut their eucalyptus trees from their agricultural land in Sy No 160 LPM No 1077 Ac 650 cents situated at Pamidipadu Village Nuzendia Mandal of Palnadu District only at the instance of the local politicians who are in power as illegal arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 not to harass the petitioners by calling them to the station and making them to sit in the station from morning to evening and pass…”

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

The writ petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus, complaining that the respondent/ police, particularly respondent No.3, interfering in the civil dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.4.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on the basis of written instructions, submits that a complaint was made by one Sri Bathula Bramaiah and, upon due enquiry, it was found that there exists a civil dispute between the parties. Respondent No.3 advised the parties to settle the matter

before the competent Civil Court and that the further stated that police would not interfere in civil disputes.

In view of the above circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no further orders are required in the present writ petition, as the police authorities are not interfering in the civil dispute between the parties.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. The written instructions furnished by the respondents shall form part of the record. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA, J

Dated: 04.06.2026 JLSR

32

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA

W.p.No.15146 of 2026

Dated: 04.06.2026 JLSR