Guduthula Lalitha Sankar Vara Prasad Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Guduthula Lalitha Sankar Vara Prasad Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Andhra Pradesh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No substantive relief; petition disposed of as its purpose stood sub-served (charge sheet filed; case taken on file as C.C. No. 675 of 2026), with liberty reserved to the petitioner to file a private complaint (Cr.P.C. ss. 190 & 200 / BNSS ss. 210 & 223); no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of Respondent No.3 in not conducting investigation in FIR No. 323 of 2024 Dt. 30-10-2024 and not filing the final report u/s 193 BNSS was highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution, warranting mandamus to direct proper, fair and expeditious investigation and filing of the final report. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

As investigation in FIR No. 323 of 2024 has been completed and the Charge Sheet filed, with the case taken on file as C.C. No. 675 of 2026, the Writ Petition is disposed of because the purpose for filing it is already sub-served.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner feels the investigation was not conducted on proper lines, he is at liberty to file a private complaint under Section 190 read with Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. / Section 210 read with Section 223 of the BNSS.obiter¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), W.P. No. 7458/2026 (Dr. Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao, decided 18.03.2026): Petitioner sought mandamus declaring the SHO, Cyber Crime Police Station, Visakhapatnam's inaction — non-investigation of FIR No. 323 of 2024 (Dt. 30-10-2024) and non-filing of final report u/s 193 BNSS — illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. On the Assistant Government Pleader's written instructions that investigation was complete, the Charge Sheet filed and the case taken on file as C.C. No. 675 of 2026 (printed as 06.03.02026), the Court disposed of the Writ Petition as its purpose was already sub-served, reserving to the petitioner liberty to file a private complaint under Section 190 read with Section 200 Cr.P.C. / Section 210 read with Section 223 BNSS if he felt the investigation was not on proper lines. No order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, closed.

[3521]

APHC010117612026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 7458/2026

Between:

GUDUTHULA LALITHA SANKAR VARA PRASAD, S/O G.CHANDRA RAO, OCC PRIVTAE SERVICES , AGED 32 R/O D.NO.2-100/10, SANTHI NAGAR, AGANAMPUDI VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, AP

...PETITIONER

AND

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P.SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION VISAKHAPATNAM , VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.YASWANTH GADE

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR HOME

The Court made the following:

2

ORDER:

The Writ Petition has been filed for the following relief:

“…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents more particularly 3rd respondent in not conducting investigationin FIR No. 323 of 2024 Dt. 30-10-2024 on the file of the 3rd respondent Police Station and not filing final report as required u/s 193 of the BNSS as highly illegal, arbitrary and in violation of article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd respondent police station to conduct proper and fair investigation in FIR No. 323 of 2024 Dt. 30-10-2024 on its file as ecpeditiously as possible with in the tinne frame and file final report in the said cases…”

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

Mr.G.Yaswanth, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Mr.

G. Yaswanth, learned counsel for the Petitioner, submits that though FIR No.323 of 2024 dated 30.10.2024 was registered on the file of the Respondent No.3 Police Station, the Respondent No.3 has failed to conduct any investigation and has not filed the final report as mandated under law.

Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that after completion of thorough investigation in FIR No.323 of 2024 dated 30.10.2024, the Charge Sheet has been filed and the case has been taken on file as C.C. No. 675 of 2026 on 06.03.02026.

Considering the above submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of, as the purpose for filing the Writ Petition is already sub-served. However, if the petitioner feels that the investigation has not been conducted on proper lines, as submitted, he is at liberty to file a private complaint under Section 190 read with Section 200 of ‘the Cr.P.C.,’ / Section 210 read with 223 of ‘the BNSS’.

3

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as

to costs.

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

________________________ Dr.Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

Date: 18.03.2026 PRA

4

101

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 7458 of 2026

Date: 18.03.2026 PRA