Disposed¶27

Shaik Mazaharulla v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Mar 2026WP/5794/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP HC Amaravati, Writ Petition No. 5794 of 2026, decided 03.03.2026, Dr Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao; Shaik Mazaharulla v. State of Andhra Pradesh; Article 226 mandamus against police summons notice dated 22.02.2026; Sections 94 and 106 BNSS 2023 summons deemed due process; earlier direction in W.P. No. 16404 of 2025 (03.07.2025) not breached; petitioner directed to cooperate with Investigating Officer; disposed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

The Investigating Officer followed due process of law by issuing notice as contemplated under Sections 94 and 106 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; consequently, the petitioner is required to cooperate with the Investigating Officer. ¶26

Shaik Mazaharulla Vs the State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010108182026

¶2

[3521]

¶3

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

¶4

TUESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 5794/2026

Between:

Shaik Mazaharulla

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶12

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶13

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶14

1.SOMISETTY GANESH BABU

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶16

1.GP FOR HOME

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶18

The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶19

India seeking the following relief:-

¶20

<…to Issue an appropriate Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No 3 in issuing notice dated 22 02 2026 directing the Petitioner to appear on 26.02.2026 in spite of the specific direction issued by this Honble Court in W P No 16404 of 2025 dated 03.07.2025 as illegal arbitrary without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and Consequently set aside the notice dated 22 02 2026 issued by the 3rd Respondent and Pass such other order(s)…=

¶21

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant

¶22

Government Pleader for Home.

¶23

¶24

3 . Sri S. Ganesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was issued a notice dated 22.02.2026 requiring him to appear on 26.02.2026, despite there being a specific direction issued by this Court in W.P. No.16404 of 2025 dated 03.07.2025.

¶25

Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that the Investigating Officer only summoned the petitioner, as he is acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, and that substantial amounts were credited into his account from the account of Accused No.1. This Court, in W.P.No.16404 of 2025, directed the Investigating Officer not to disturb the peace of the petitioner without following due process of law.

¶26

It appears that the Investigating Officer has followed the due process of law by issuing notice as contemplated under Sections 94 and 106 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity 8the BNSS9). If that be so, the petitioner is required to cooperate with the Investigating Officer. If it is found that the petitioner has also committed the alleged offences, he is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum seeking appropriate relief.

¶27