Disposed

Pottipati Sunil Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Sept 2026WP/614/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged harassment by police regarding duty-related allegations and sought direction to restrain police from calling him. Court noted crime registration and accused status, holding it could not restrain police from lawful investigation but directed the police to proceed strictly in accordance with law, disposing of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 5 police to proceed with investigation in Crime No.6 of 2023 strictly in accordance with law. No order as to costs.

Pottipati Sunil Babu Vs The… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

SUN, J W.P.No.614 of 2023

¶3

[3604]

¶4

APHC010010272023

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶6

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶7

TUESDAY, THE 15^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026

¶8

PRESENT

¶9

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO: 614/2023

¶11

Between:

¶12

POTTIPATI SUNIL BABU, S/ O. P.SURESH BABU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCC. SENIOR ASSISTANT, SUB-REGISTRAR (URBAN), KADAPA, YSR (KADAPA) DISTRICT, R/O. D.NO.52/37-29, PRASHANTH NAGAR, K.RAMAPURAM STREET, RAYACHOTI, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT (ERSTWHILE YSR (KADAPA) DISTRICT

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELGAPUDI, AMRAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶16

THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AMRAVATHI.

¶17

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, YSR (KADAPA) DISTRICT

¶18

THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADAPA, YSR (KADAPA) DISTRICT

¶19

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TALUK U/G POLICE STATION, KADAPA, YSR (KADAPA) DISTRICT

¶20

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, YSR (KADAPA) DISTRICT

¶21

THE TAHSILDAR, KADAPA, YSR (KADAPA) DISTRICT

¶22

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶23

¶24

SUN, J W.P.No.614 of 2023

¶25

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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents more particularly respondent No.5 in frequently calling the petitioner to the 5th respondent police station upon the letter addressed by the respondent No.7 through Ref.No.B1/1566/2022, dated 19.12.2022 to the respondent No.6 and harassing the petitioner and interfering in the personal liberties of the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary without jurisdiction and also violating Article 14, 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to harass the petitioner in calling to the respondent No.5 Police Station and not to interfere with the personal liberties of the petitioner and pass

¶26

IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶27

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 pleased to direct the respondents more particularly respondent No.5 not to harass the petitioner in calling to the respondent No.5 Police Station and not to interfere with the personal liberties of the petitioner, pending disposal of the main writ petition and pass

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶29

1.SHAIK MOHAMMED ISMAIL

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶31

1.GP FOR HOME

¶32

2.GP FOR REVENUE

¶33

The Court made the following:

¶34

¶35

SUN, J W.P.No.614 of 2023

¶36

THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM

¶37

WRIT PETITION No: 614 OF 2023

¶38

ORDER:

¶39

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner to direct the respondents not to call or harass the petitioner to attend to the police station and not to interfere with the personal liberties of the petitioner.

¶40

The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he is working as Senior Assistant in the office of the Sub-Registrar (Urban), Kadapa, and was placed in charge of the post of Sub-Registrar (Rural), Kadapa, on 05.07.2022. While discharging his duties as Sub-Registrar, he registered more than 100 documents presented before the Sub-Registrar (Rural), Kadapa. Respondent No.7 addressed a letter vide Ref.No.B1/1566/2022, dated 28.12.2022, to respondent No.6, requesting permission to register a criminal case against the petitioner, alleging that the petitioner had made seven fraudulent registrations in respect of land in Sy.No.147/C2 of Gudur Village on the basis of a fabricated death certificate and family member certificate. Basing on the said letter, respondent No.5 allegedly called the petitioner to the police station on several occasions and harassed him. The petitioner states that on 29.12.2022 and 30.12.2022 also he was asked to attend the police station, where he explained that he had discharged his duties in accordance with law and that he was pursuing appropriate remedies in relation to the allegations made by respondent No.7 before this Court. 3. The petitioner further contends that, if the documents in question are bogus or fabricated, the affected parties have appropriate civil and criminal remedies against the persons who sought to derive benefit from such documents. According to the petitioner, neither the Tahsildar nor the SubRegistrar could conclusively determine the genuineness or otherwise of the documents in question and respondent No.5 could not, under the guise of his

¶41

¶42

SUN, J W.P.No.614 of 2023

¶43

official position, resort to illegal methods or interfere with the personal liberty of the petitioner.

¶44

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submitted that the Mandal Tahsildar, Kadapa, addressed a letter dated 28.12.2022 alleging that the petitioner, while acting as Joint Sub-Registrar (Rural), Kadapa, had colluded and conspired with one Sahik Sahera Bhanu and her children and generated seven fraudulent registered documents bearing Document Nos.6364 to 6380 of 2022 in respect of an extent of Ac.0.48 cents in Sy.No.147/C2 of Gudur Village, without verifying the death certificate and family member certificate alleged to be fabricated. It is stated that, before registration of the crime, respondent No.5 contacted the petitioner by phone, informed him about the allegations and requested him to come to the police station, but never insisted that he remain there unnecessarily.

¶45

It is further submitted that, after conducting an enquiry, Crime No.6 of 2023 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 thereof, and the petitioner was arrayed as accused No.4. It is stated that, soon after registration of the crime, the petitioner applied for casual leave and left Kadapa. During investigation, six witnesses were examined and their detailed statements were recorded. According to the respondents, the investigation revealed the alleged involvement of the petitioner in the generation of the fraudulent documents.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that the writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to respondent No.5 police to proceed in accordance with law.

¶47

Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and the material placed on record, it is evident that, subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, Crime No.6 of 2023 came to be registered for the offences referred to above and the petitioner has been arrayed as accused

¶48

¶49

SUN, J W.P.No.614 of 2023

¶50

No.4. In view of the registration of the crime and the petitioner's status as an accused therein, this Court cannot issue a direction restraining the police from taking steps in accordance with law or from requiring the petitioner to participate in the investigation in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law. At the same time, the police are bound to conduct the investigation fairly and strictly in accordance with law.

¶51

In view of the above circumstances and the fair submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, no further orders are necessary except to direct respondent No.5-police to proceed with the investigation in Crime No.6 of 2023 strictly in accordance with law.

¶52

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.5 police to proceed in accordance with law in respect of Crime No.6 of 2023. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶53

As a sequel thereto, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶54

SUNITHA GANDHAM, J

¶55

15.09.2026

¶56

Vns

¶57

________________________

Pottipati Sunil Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pottipati Sunil Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases