Y Nagamma Vs the State of Ap

“…to issue an appropriate order writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the actions of Respondent Nos 3 and 4 in calling summoning visiting and coercing the Petitioner and in interfering with the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No 5 without following due process of law as illegal arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently restrain the Respondent Police more particularly Respondents 3 and 4 from calling summoning visiting or otherwise interfering with the Petitioner in relation to the said civil disputes and direct the police authorities not to interfere and not to call the petitioners to police station in matters which are purely civil in nature and to pass….”

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader.

¶31

Sri N. Chandra Sekhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶32

submits that respondent Nos.3 and 4 are calling, summoning, visiting, and coercing the petitioner and are unnecessarily interfering in a civil dispute relating to the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6.

¶33

3

¶34

Dr. YLR, J W.P.No.3285 of 2026 Dated 05.02.2026

¶35

Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that respondent No.4 received a complaint on 28.01.2026 against the petitioner. Based on the said complaint, a case in Cr.No.25 of 2026 was registered on 31.01.2026 under Sections 316(5) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNS’). Pursuant thereto, respondent No.4 conducted a preliminary enquiry under Section 173(3) of ‘the BNSS’ and called the petitioner over phone. However, the petitioner did not respond to come to the police station. In the enquiry, it was revealed that a civil dispute is pending between the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6.

¶36

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing respondent No.4 not to interfere in the civil disputes pending between the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6. However, respondent No.4 is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law against the petitioner in respect of proceedings pending in Cr.No.25 of 2026.

¶37