Dismissed¶34

Sanapala Ramalakshmi v. The State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC1 Mar 2026WP/5096/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Andhra Pradesh High Court at Amaravati; writ petition dismissed as infructuous; police interference in civil matters; SHO Airport Police Station Visakhapatnam; petitioner summoned to police station; writ of mandamus; Article 226; Article 21; Article 300A; Section 151 CPC; IA No. 1 of 2019; Sanapala Ramalakshmi; Karri Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Reddy; Commissioner of Police Visakhapatnam; Justice B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi; no relief granted; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications closed.

What did the court decide?

On the recorded submission of petitioner's counsel that the cause in the writ petition no longer survives for adjudication and the petition has become infructuous, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs. ¶34

Sanapala Ramalakshmi Vs The State of Ap — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010114072019

¶2

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

¶3

[3368]

¶4

MONDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF MARCH

¶5

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 5096/2019

¶9

Between:

¶10

SANAPALA RAMALAKSHMI, W/O. SRI SREENIVASA RAO, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/0. 39-19-111, MADHAVADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF AP, THROUGH SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.

¶14

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM.

¶15

THE S H O, AIRPORT POLICE STATION, V TOWN, VISAKHAPATNAM

¶16

KARRI VEERA VENKATA SATYANARAYANA REDDY, S/O. SRI VENKATA REDDY, AGED 56 YEARS, OCC DEPUTY MANAGER, ANDHRA BANK, ZONAL OFFICE, KAKINADA, R/O. RAJENDRA NAGAR, KANINADA - 3

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

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 a Writ or order/s more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent no. 3 in interfering in Civil matters and in summoning the petitioner to the police station and making the petitioner to sit in police station, as being illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 and 300A of constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondent no. 3 not to summon the petitioner to the police station and not to interfere in Civil matters and be pleased to pass

¶19

¶20

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶21

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 to the Respondent no. 3 not to summon the petitioner to the police and not to interfere in Civil Matters, pending disposal of the Writ petition and be pleased to pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶23

1.V VENKATA MAYUR

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶25

1.GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶26

The Court made the following:

¶27

¶28

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

¶29

WRIT PETITION No.5096 of 2019

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri A. Veera Reddy, learned counsel representing Sri A. Venkata Mayur, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, submitted that, at this length of time, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for further adjudication and that the writ petition has become infructuous.

¶32

Sri R. Mallikarjuna Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader

¶33

for Home, representing respondent Nos.1 to 3, is in attendance.

¶34

Recording the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶36

______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

2^nd March, 2026 cbn

124

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

¶41