Dismissed¶30

Smt.Kommineni Durgamma v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Feb 2026WP/6805/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge order of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Justice B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi, 06.02.2026) dismissing Writ Petition No. 6805/2019 for non-prosecution due to repeated non-appearance of the petitioner; no order as to costs; pending interlocutory applications closed. Underlying subject, per the State's submission, concerned police protection/non-interference in a matter described as civil in nature. No statutes or precedents cited; no quantum involved.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution, as no one appeared for the writ petitioner and the petitioner appeared not interested in prosecuting the writ petition. ¶30

Smt.Kommineni Durgamma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

APHC010149142019

¶2

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

¶3

[3368]

¶4

FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

¶7

WRIT PETITION No: 6805/2019

¶8

Between:

¶9

SMT.KOMMINENI DURGAMMA, W/O. LATE VEERAIAH, AGED 45 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD R/O. REDDYGUDEM VILLAGE AND MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT

¶13

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KRISHNA, DISTRICT AT MACHILIPATNAM

¶14

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE REDDYGUDEM, REDDYGUDEM MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶15

KONDAPALLI KONDALA RAO, S/O. RAMA KOTAIAH, AGED 47 YEARS R/O. REDDYGUDEM, REDDYGUDEM MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT

¶16

KONDAPALLI RAMAKRISHNA, S/O. KONDALA RAO, AGED 30 YEARS R/O. REDDYGUDEM, REDDYGUDEM MANDAL KRISHNA DISTRICT.

¶17

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶19

KONDAPALLI SYAM SUNDER

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶21

GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶22

The Court made the following:

¶23

¶24

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

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.6805 OF 2019

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

No one appeared for the writ petitioner either physically or through video conference, though the matter is posted under the caption ‘for dismissal’. Earlier also, there was no representation for the writ petitioner.

¶28

Sri R.Mallikharjuna Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on previous adjournment instructions would submit that the matter is of civil in nature and there was no order from the Civil Court to provide any police protection, and therefore, police could not interfere in the matter.

¶29