Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/14968/2026 of Alapati Chenchu Ramaiah Chetty Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 27 May 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3573] THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BALAJI MEDAMALLI WRIT PETITION NO: 14968/2026 Between: 1. ALAPATI CHENCHU RAMAIAH CHETTY, S/O. A.C. CHENCHAIAH
APHC010286382026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
Between:
1. ALAPATI CHENCHU RAMAIAH CHETTY, S/O. A.C. CHENCHAIAH
CHETTY, AGED 63 YRS, R/O. 9-123, ADAM COLONY, NAGARI, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT
BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI AT VELAGAPUDI, GMITUR DISTRICT -
522238.
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, STATE OF ANDHRA
PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT - 522303.
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT -
517002.
4. THE DY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOOR DISTRICT -
517002.
5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NAGARI POLICE STATION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 57590.
6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NAGARI POLICE STATION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 517590
...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 under Article 226 of the constitution of India by declaring the inaction of respondent No. 6 viz.. Cl of Police, Nagari Police Station in threatening and forcing the petitioner and his family members to come for settlement with the private persons in connection with the commercial buildings bearing D.No. 10-9-125 and D.No. 10-9-155 situated at Palli Patti Road, Nagari as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and to pass such IA NO: 1 OF 2026
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 may be pleased to direct the respondent No. 6 viz.. Cl of Police, Nagari Police Station not to call the petitioner to Nagari Police Station by forcing him and his family members to come for a settlement with private persons in connection with the commercial buildings bearing D.No. 10-9-125 and D.No. 10-9-155
situated at Palli Patti Road, Nagari and to pass such Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. D PURNACHANDRA REDDY
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
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 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner seeking the following relief: “…to issue writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the constitution of India by declaring the inaction of respondent No. 6 viz., Cl of Police, Nagari Police Station in threatening and forcing the petitioner and his family members to come for settlement with the private persons in connection with the commercial buildings bearing D.No. 10-9-125 and D.No. 10-9-155 situated at Palli Patti Road, Nagari …”
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the grievance of the petitioner is that the police, particularly, the 6th respondent who is the Circle Inspector of Police, Nagari Police Station is threatening and forcing the petitioner and his family members to come for settlement with the third parties.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, submitted that one C.Narasimhulu Naidu, presented a complaint on 09.05.2026 stating that he has advanced certain amounts to the petitioner periodically in connection with the construction of the house of the petitioner and that the petitioner failed to repay the amounts and interest as agreed between the parties. Upon receipt of the said complaint, the Station House
Officer, discharged his lawful duties, called both parties to the police station, but the petitioner’s son appeared before the police and represented that the petitioner is not feeling well and requested one week time. Thereafter, neither the petitioner nor his son attended the police station. The petitioner also sent a complaint through registered post on 13.05.2026 to the Station House Officer, Nagiri P.S., and also submitted PGRS complaint on 18.05.2026 and the same was entrusted to the Inspector of Police who is the 6th respondent herein. Pursuant thereto, the matter was examined by the respondent police and both parties were again called to the police station but the petitioner did not turn up.
5. As per the above written instructions, it is evident that the police have called the petitioner as well as the said C.Narasimhulu Naidu, for the purpose of enquiry and it appears that there are some disputes between them. However, the police have stated that the petitioner did not turn up for the enquiry.
6. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent-police not to interfere in the civil disputes between the two private individuals, unless there is any cognizable offence took place. The respondent/police are further directed to strictly adhere to the procedure contemplated under law before initiating any further action against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________ BALAJI MEDAMALLI, J
Date: 28.05.2026 UPS
Date: 28.05.2026 UPS