Dismissed¶30

Sk Munna Basha v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Feb 2026WP/3224/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati; W.P. No. 3224/2019; SK Munna Basha v. State of AP, SP Kurnool and SHO Nandyal I Town Police Station; mandamus sought for registration of crime on complaint dated 27.09.2018; complaint earlier rejected by Human Rights Commission and not challenged; IA No. 1/2019 under Section 151 CPC; dismissed for non-prosecution; no order as to costs; pending IAs closed; Justice B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi; decided 10.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution, none having appeared for the writ petitioner though the matter was posted under the caption 'for dismissal', with no representation on earlier occasions as well; there shall be no order as to costs. The Court did not decide the merits of the mandamus claim. ¶30

Sk Munna Basha Vs the State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010072262019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3368] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 3224/2019

¶7

Between:

¶8

SK MUNNA BASHA, S/O. RABBANI BASHA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O. H.NO.3/535, J-3, BAIRMAL STREET, NANDYAL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶12

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KURNOOL, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

¶13

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NANDYAL I TOWN POLICE STATION, KURNOOL DISTRICT.

¶14

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶15

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 a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the 3rd Respondent as illegal and arbitrary in not taking action on the complaint dated 27.09.2018 given by the petitioner herein and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to register a Crime and investigating to the same basing on the complaint given by the petitioner herein

¶16

¶17

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶18

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 direct the 3rd Respondent to register a Crime on the complaint given by the petitioner herein dated 27.09.2018, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶20

1.K.S.G. PADMAVATHI

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶22

1.GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶23

The Court made the following:

¶24

¶25

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

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.3224 OF 2019

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

None appeared for the writ petitioner though the matter is posted under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Earlier also, there was no representation for the writ petitioner.

¶29

Sri R.Mallikarjuna Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on the earlier adjournment would submit that the complaint filed by the petitioner was rejected by the Human Rights Commission. He did not approach the proper forum challenging the order of the Human Rights Commission, instead, he filed the present writ petition with false allegations.

¶30