M Sudha Mani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

M Sudha Mani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondent No.3 directed to give logical conclusion to the FIR (Crime No.38 of 2026) in accordance with law; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the inaction of Respondent No.3 (SHO, Ananthapuramu Rural Police Station) in not registering a crime/FIR on the Petitioner's complaint dated 03.02.2026, despite enquiring her at the Government Hospital, Ananthapuram pursuant to Dial 100 information and recording her statement, is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

In view of the registration of the Petitioner's complaint as Crime No.38 of 2026 under Sections 118(1), 74 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition directing Respondent No.3 to give logical conclusion to the FIR in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of.ratio¶30
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati (Special Original Jurisdiction), Dr Justice Y. Lakshmana Rao, Writ Petition No. 9131/2026, decided 08.04.2026. Petitioner M Sudha Mani sought a Writ of Mandamus (filed under Article 226) declaring illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 the inaction of Respondent No.3 (SHO, Ananthapuramu Rural Police Station) in not registering a crime on her complaint dated 03.02.2026 despite enquiry at Government Hospital, Ananthapuram pursuant to Dial 100 information and recording of her statement, and seeking registration of an FIR and lawful investigation. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submitted that the complaint had been registered as Crime No.38 of 2026 under Sections 118(1), 74 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Ananthapuramu Rural Police Station on 23.02.2026 at 06:00 PM. In that view, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition directing Respondent No.3 to give logical conclusion to the FIR in accordance with law; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stood closed.

[3521]

APHC010081112026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

WEDNESDAY,THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 9131/2026

Between:

M SUDHA MANI, W/O M. PRASAD, AGED 37 YEARS, R/O D.NO.2/14, NARASANAYANAKUNTA VILLAGE, ANANTHAPURAMU RURAL MANDAL, ANANTHAPURAMU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

...PETITIONER

AND

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, A.P SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.PIN-52238

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT.PIN-515001

THE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE SHO, ANANTAPURAMU RURAL POLICE STATION, ANANTAPURAMU DISTRICT.PIN-515001

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.NALLANI VAMSI KRISHNA

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR HOME

2

The Court made the following ORDER :

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

India seeking the following relief:-

“…to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the 3rd Respondent in not registering a crime based on the petitioner's complaint dated 03.02.2026, even after enquiring the complainant at the Government Hospital, Ananthapuram, pursuant to the information furnished through Dial 100 and after recording her statement as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to forthwith register an FIR on the basis of the said complaint and proceed with investigation strictly in accordance with law, and pass ….”

Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Assistant

Government Pleader.

Mr. Nallani Vamsi Krishna, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Respondent No.3 has failed to register an FIR pursuant to the complaint dated 30.02.2026 filed by the Petitioner.

Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the complaint of the Petitioner was registered as Crime No.38 of 2026 under Sections 118 (1), 74 read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the B.N.S’) at Ananthapuramu Rural Police Station, on 23.02.2026 at 06:00 PM.

In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing Respondent No.3 to give logical conclusion to the FIR in accordance with law.

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

to costs.

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

_________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J

Date: 08.04.2026 SSA

3

172

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 9131 of 2026

Date: 08.04.2026 SSA