Bai reddyPaninderreddy, Vs State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Bai reddyPaninderreddy, Vs State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition was closed at the stage of admission without going into the merits, following counsel's submission that the petitioner had not come forward to prosecute the petition and that the matter was settled out of Court. No order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether a mandamus should issue directing respondents 1 to 3 to conduct an enquiry into the conduct of respondent No.4 (Inspector of Police) for threatening, abusing and misbehaving with the petitioner for lodging FIR No.162 of 2019, and to initiate appropriate disciplinary action including registering a crime under relevant sections of IPC.

Court's answer

The Writ Petition is Closed at the stage of admission, without going into the merits of the case, and there shall be no order as to costs.

Ratio / Principle

As a sequel to the closure of the writ petition, interlocutory applications, if any, pending therein shall stand closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Andhra Pradesh High Court (B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi, J.) closed, at the stage of admission and expressly without going into the merits, a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in which the petitioner sought a mandamus directing respondents 1 to 3 to conduct an enquiry into the conduct of respondent No.4, an Inspector of Police, for threatening, abusing and misbehaving with the petitioner for lodging a complaint in FIR No.162 of 2019, dated 21-8-2019, and to initiate appropriate disciplinary action against him including registering a crime under relevant sections of IPC. Closure was on the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had not come forward to prosecute the petition, coupled with the learned Assistant Government Pleader's submission that the matter was settled out of Court. There was no order as to costs, and interlocutory applications pending in the writ petition, including IA No.1 of 2019 under Section 151 CPC seeking suspension of respondent No.4, stood closed as a sequel. Precedential value: nil, as no issue was decided on merits.

[3368]

APHC010332132019

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

WEDNESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

WRIT PETITION NO: 15708/2019

Between:

BAIREDDY PANINDERREDDY, S/O JAGAN MOHAN REDDY AGED 28 YEARS, OCC- FORMER H.NO 3-547, RAM PURAM VILLAGE, OWKMANDAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...PETITIONER

AND

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, AP

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KURNOOL DIST.

THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DHONE, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

SURESH KUMAR REDDY, INSPECTOR OF POLICE, BANAGANAPALLI, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

...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 to issue an order or direction more particularly in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3, to conduct an enquiry into the conduct of the respondent no.4, in threatening, abusing and misbehaving with the petitioner herein for lodging a complaint in FIR no.162 of 2019, dated 21-8-2019 and initiate appropriate disciplinary action against him including registering a crime against him under relevant sections of IPC

2

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

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 to Pending finalization of the writ petition, I pray that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent 1 to 3 to place the 4th respondent under suspension as he is in a position to influence the witnesses and change the course of enquiry

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.P BHASKAR

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR HOME (AP)

The Court made the following:

3

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI

WRIT PETITION No.15708 OF 2019

ORDER:

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

“….to issue an order or direction more particularly in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3, to conduct an enquiry into the conduct of the respondent no.4, in threatening, abusing and misbehaving with the petitioner herein for lodging a complaint in FIR No.162 of 2019, dated 21-8-2019 and initiate appropriate disciplinary action against him including registering a crime against him under relevant sections of IPC and pass…”

Heard Sri Nirvarthi Mruthyanjaya Sastry, learned counsel representing Sri P.Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.Mallikarjuna Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not come forward to prosecute the petition, and in the light of submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that the matter was settled out of Court, the petition may be closed.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is Closed at the stage of admission, without going into the merits of the case. There shall be no order as to costs.

4

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in

this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

11.02.2026 Dmr

5

110

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

WRIT PETITION No:15708 OF 2019

Dmr

Date: 11.02.2026