Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Yadlapalli Indira Kumari Vs the State of Ap — Cheating and Forgery | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Home
Andhra Pradesh HC
2026
Yadlapalli Indira Kumari Vs the State of ApYadlapalli Indira Kumari v. the State of Ap

Dismissed¶38

Yadlapalli Indira Kumari v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Feb 2026WP/9291/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: writ of mandamus; Article 226; non-registration of FIR; complaint dt.27-6-2019; Secs.420, 448, 468, 506(2) IPC; Section 151 CPC interim application; IA No.1 of 2019; permission to withdraw; dismissal as withdrawn; no order as to costs; interlocutory applications closed. Parties: Yadlapalli Indira Kumari (petitioner); State of AP Home Department, SP West Godavari, CI Penugonda, SHO Penumantra, Pilli Raja Rao, Pilli Dharma Rao, Pilli Martha Kumari, Piili Narasimhulu (respondents). Bench: Justice B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi. Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati. Date of order: 18.02.2026. Counsel: G.V. Anand Kumar / Smt. D. Savithri for petitioner; GP for Home (AP) / R. Mallikarjuna Rao for respondents. Useful for locating withdrawal-disposition writ petitions where the substantive FIR-registration issue remained undecided; contains no adjudicated holding on FIR registration.

What did the court decide?

Permission accorded to the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition. ¶37

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the inaction of respondent nos. 2 to 4 in not registering the FIR pursuant to the petitioner's complaint dt.27-6-2019 against unofficial respondent nos. 5 to 8 was illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, warranting a writ of mandamus directing them to register the FIR under Secs.420, 448, 468 and 506(2) IPC.

Ratio / Principle

Permission accorded to the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition.

Key takeaways

The Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs.ratio¶38
Pending interlocutory applications, if any, in the writ petition shall stand closed as a sequel to its withdrawal/dismissal.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No.9291 of 2019 (High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, Special Original Jurisdiction; single bench of Justice B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi; decided 18.02.2026): Petitioner Yadlapalli Indira Kumari had sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 declaring illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional the inaction of respondent nos. 2 to 4 (SP West Godavari, CI Penugonda, SHO Penumantra) in not registering an FIR pursuant to her complaint dt.27-6-2019 against unofficial respondent nos. 5 to 8 under Secs.420, 448, 468 and 506(2) IPC, and directing registration of the FIR; IA No.1 of 2019 under Section 151 CPC sought the same interim relief. On the hearing date, Smt. D. Savithri (representing Sri G.V. Anand Kumar) tendered a memo seeking permission to withdraw the petition; permission was accorded and the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with no order as to costs, and pending interlocutory applications stood closed. The merits of the FIR-non-registration grievance were not adjudicated; no precedent was invoked.

A

APHC010209252019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3368] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

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

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI

WRIT PETITION NO: 9291/2019

Between:

YADLAPALLI INDIRA KUMARI, W/O.RAJARATNAM, HINDU, FEMALE, AGED 29 YRS, HOUSE-WIFE, R/O.D.NO.24A-3-31, AMEENA PETA, ELURU-2. W.G.DT

...PETITIONER

AND

THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, , WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT. ELURU.

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PENUGONDA. WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, , PENUMANTRA POLICE STATION, PENUMANTRA. WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

PILLI RAJA RAO, S/O.NOT KNOWN, HINDU, MALE, AGED 55 YRS, R/O.AMBEDKAR NAGAR, POLAMURI VILLAGE, PENUMANTRA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

PILLI DHARMA RAO, S/O.RAJA RAO, HINDU, MALE, AGED 33 YRS, R/O.AMBEDKAR NAGAR, POLAMURI VILLAGE, PENUMANTRA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

PILLI MARTHA KUMARI, W/O. NARASIMHULU, HINDU, FEMALE, AGED 30 YRS, R/O.AMBEDKAR NAGAR, POLAMURI VILLAGE, PENUMANTRA MANDAL, WEST

2

GODAVARI DISTRICT.

PIILI NARASIMHULU, , S/O.RAJA RAO, HINDU, MALE, AGED 35 YRS, R/O.AMBEDKAR NAGAR, POLAMURI VILLAGE, PENUMANTRA MANDAL, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

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 to issue Writ Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the inaction of the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in not registering the FIR in pursuance of the petitioner's complaint, dt.27-6-2019 against unofficial respondent nos. 5 to 8, is quite illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently to direct the respondent nos. 2 to 4 to register the FIR in pursuance of the complaint, dt.27-6-2019 made by the petitioner against the unofficial respondent nos. 5 to 8 under Secs.420, 448, 468 and 506 (2) IPC and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2019

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 be pleased to direct the respondent nos.2 to 4 to register the FIR in pursuance of the complaint, dt.27-6-2019 made by the petitioner against the unofficial respondent nos.5 to 8 under Secs.420, 448, 468 & 506 (2) IPC pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.G.V.ANAND KUMAR

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1.GP FOR HOME (AP)

The Court made the following:

3

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

WRIT PETITION No.9291 OF 2019

ORDER:

Smt.D.Savithri, learned counsel representing Sri G.V.Anand Kumar, learned counsel for the writ petitioner would submit that a memo filed seeking permission to withdraw the petition.

Sri R.Mallikarjuna Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader

for Home is in attendance.

Permission accorded to withdraw the petition.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There

shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

______________________________ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI

18.02.2026 Dmr

4

84

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

WRIT PETITION No:9291 OF 2019

Date: 18.02.2026

Dmr

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the inaction of respondent nos. 2 to 4 in not registering the FIR pursuant to the petitioner's complaint dt.27-6-2019 against unofficial respondent nos. 5 to 8 was illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, warranting a writ of mandamus directing them to register the FIR under Secs.420, 448, 468 and 506(2) IPC.¶22

Statutes considered

6 provisions across 3 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226¶22
Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)151¶24
Indian Penal Code (IPC)420¶22 448¶22 468¶22 506(2)¶22

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Inaction of respondent nos. 2 to 4 in not registering an FIR in pursuance of the petitioner's complaint dt.27-6-2019 against unofficial respondent nos. 5 to 8 (administrative inaction challenged via writ of mandamus, not a judicial order)¶22
Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 (Superintendent of Police, West Godavari District; Circle Inspector of Police, Penugonda; Station House Officer, Penumantra Police Station)
Prior proceeding
Petitioner lodged a complaint dt.27-6-2019 against unofficial respondent nos. 5 to 8 alleging offences punishable under Secs.420, 448, 468 and 506(2) IPC; the respondent nos. 2 to 4 did not register an FIR in pursuance of that complaint.¶22
Prior proceeding
IA No. 1 of 2019 was filed under Section 151 CPC praying for an interim direction to respondent nos. 2 to 4 to register the FIR in pursuance of the complaint dt.27-6-2019 pending disposal of the writ petition.¶24
Prior proceeding
At the time of hearing, counsel for the petitioner filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the petition.¶34

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
YADLAPALLI INDIRA KUMARI¶8
G.V. Anand Kumar, Smt. D. Savithri
respondent
THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT¶11
GP FOR HOME (AP), R. Mallikarjuna Rao
respondent
THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, ELURU¶12
respondent
THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PENUGONDA, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT¶13
respondent
THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PENUMANTRA POLICE STATION, PENUMANTRA, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT¶14
respondent
PILLI RAJA RAO¶15
respondent
PILLI DHARMA RAO¶16
respondent
PILLI MARTHA KUMARI¶17
respondent
PIILI NARASIMHULU¶20

Coram

AI extract

B.V.L.N. Chakravarthiauthor¶5

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Andhra Pradesh HC
Decided on: 17 Feb 2026 · February
Registered: 16 Jul 2019
Case no.: WP/9291/2019
CNR: APHC010209252019
Topic: Cheating and Forgery
Bench: B V L N Chakravarthi
Disposal: WITHDRAWN
Case type: WRIT PETITION

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from B V L N Chakravarthi

G. Anil Kumar, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Spl Pp Hyd.,for Acb., Ananthapur
16 Feb 2026
Sri v. C. Hanumanthu, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Spl. Pp Hyd., for Acb.
16 Feb 2026
G.Anil Kumar Vs the State of a.P., Rep. by Inspector of Police, Acb, Antp.
16 Feb 2026
K.Allauddin, Vs P.Krishnamoorthy and 3 Others
17 Feb 2026
K.Nagabhushanam, Vs State of a.P., Rep by Pp.
17 Feb 2026
B. Ravi Kumar, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh
17 Feb 2026

Cite this judgement

Yadlapalli Indira Kumari v. the State of Ap, WP/9291/2019 (AP), decided on 17 February 2026.

The High Court of Andhra Pradesh publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes6

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226
Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)151
Indian Penal Code (IPC)420 · 448 · 468 · 506(2)

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Inaction of respondent nos. 2 to 4 in not registering an FIR in pursuance of the petitioner's complaint dt.27-6-2019 against unofficial respondent nos. 5 to 8 (administrative inaction challenged via writ of mandamus, not a judicial order)Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 (Superintendent of Police, West Godavari District; Circle Inspector of Police, Penugonda; Station House Officer, Penumantra Police Station)
Petitioner lodged a complaint dt.27-6-2019 against unofficial respondent nos. 5 to 8 alleging offences punishable under Secs.420, 448, 468 and 506(2) IPC; the respondent nos. 2 to 4 did not register an FIR in pursuance of that complaint.
IA No. 1 of 2019 was filed under Section 151 CPC praying for an interim direction to respondent nos. 2 to 4 to register the FIR in pursuance of the complaint dt.27-6-2019 pending disposal of the writ petition.

View full history

Bench / Coram

B.V.L.N. Chakravarthi

Parties & counsel