Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/32357/2022 of CHODAVARAPU DOONDI LAKSHMI Vs THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH on 17 August 2026
for orders : Date of pronouncement : 18.08.2026 Date of uploading : 19.08.2026 APHC010529982022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3604] TUESDAY, THE 18th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM WRIT PETITION NO:
Date of reserved for orders :
Date of pronouncement : 18.08.2026
Date of uploading : 19.08.2026
APHC010529982022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE 18th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 32357 OF 2022
Between:
CHODAVARAPU DOONDI LAKSHMI, W/O (LATE) SANTOSH KUMAR
AGED 22 YRS, D.NO.16-8-2/2 OFFICIAL COLONY, 3RD LANE
COLLECTOR OFFICE, VISAKHAPATNAM.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY (HOME) SECRETARIAT, VELAAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, VISAKHAPATNAM CITY.
3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER SHO, I TOWN POLICE STATION, OLD POST OFFICE AREA VISAKHAPATNAM.
4. MATERU JAYA, D/O SANYASI RAO, AGED 68 YRS NEAR
COLLECTOR OFFICE , OFFICIAL COLONY VISAKHAPATNAM.
...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 pass an Order to Issue a Writ or Order or Direction more particularly in the Nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Police particularly 3rd Respondent, its officials are Interfering into the Civil Family Disputes in between the Petitioner as well as 4th Respondent
in connection with the Possession of Property as well as monetary disputes of deceased Santosh Kumar who is a husband of petitioner and son of unofficial respondent (R-4) there by police are trying to evict the petitioner from the residential house D.No.16-8-2/2, Official Colony, Visakhapatnam all are Illegal, Unlawful, Violation of Article 14, 19, 21, 300-A of the Constitution of India, violation of principles of Natural Justice Consequently to direct the respondent police not to interfere into the Civil disputes of petitioner as well as 4th Respondent including possession of the property bearing D.No.16-8-2/2, Official Colony, Collector office Visakhapatnam in the interest of the justice.
IA NO: 1 OF 2022
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 pass an Order to Direct the S.H.O., of 3rd Respondent not to interfere into the petitioner as well as 4th respondent related civil transanction including for eviction of the petitioner from the house of her deceased husband D.N0.16-8-2/2 Official Colony, Collector Office, Visakhapatnam pending disposal of the main Writ Petition in the interest of the justice and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. R SIVA SAI SWARUP
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
2. SREEMANNARAYANA VATTIKUTI
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUNITHA GANDHAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 32357 OF 2022
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed to declare the action of the respondent No.3 police in interfering with the civil and family disputes of the petitioner and respondent No.4 and for giving assistance to the respondent No.4 to evict the petitioner from the residential house bearing No.16-8-2/2, official colony, Visakhapatnam as illegal, unlawful and in violation of the procedure established by law.
2. Case of the petitioner is, she is legally wedded wife of Sri Chodavarapu Santhosh Kumar. She used to reside in the house bearing No.16-8-2/2, official colony, Visakhapatnam along with her husband and respondent No.4 and during covid pandemic period, her husband died on 15.04.2021. Even after death of husband of the petitioner, she has been staying in the same house along with her two year old baby. Disputes arose between the petitioner and respondent No.4 in respect of movable and immovable properties of late Sri Chodavarapu Santhosh Kumar and accordingly, respondent No.4 gave report to the respondent No.3 and though it is civil dispute, respondent No.3 continuously calling the petitioner to the police station, harassing her and insisting her to vacate the house where the petitioner is living. The police have no manner of right in interfere into the civil, financial and their family matters.
3. Heard Sri R. Siva Sai Swarup, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
4. Admittedly, there are civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.4 in respect of movable and immovable properties of late Sri Chodavarapu Santhosh Kumar, who is none other than husband of the petitioner and adopted son of respondent No.4. In this regard, it is to be mentioned that it is well settled that police cannot interfere in civil disputes and the Hon’ble Apex Court repeatedly held that when the dispute is purely of civil nature, jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be exercised and further, when the dispute between two citizens is of civil nature and no crime is registered, police have no jurisdiction to interfere in the civil dispute. It is also settled that in the scheme of Constitution of India, duty to resolve civil dispute is entrusted to judiciary and police have no such power and involvement of police in a pending civil dispute or potential civil dispute between two citizens or two groups of citizens is not within the provisions of the police.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that till issuing interim direction by this Court, Sub Inspector of Police insisted the petitioner to settle the matter and also called to the Police Station and on the other hand, upon receiving oral instructions, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted that the Sub-Inspector of police would not interfere in to the civil and family disputes of the petitioner and respondent No.4.
6. In the given facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that this writ petition may be disposed of directing the respondent No.3 not to interfere in the civil and family disputes of the petitioner and respondent No.4.
7. In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.3 not to interfere in the civil disputes, if any, pending between the petitioner and respondent Nos.4. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel there to, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________ SUNITHA GANDHAM,J
Date: 18.08.2026 SSA/knl