Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 2468
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J
koneti ramachandra raju – Appellant
Versus
state of andhra pradesh – Respondent
WP 4383/2025
MUCHAKAYALA NARAYANA, GP FOR HOME
The police have discretion to classify disputes as civil and advise parties to settle amicably, which does not constitute a violation of constitutional rights.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 21, and 300-A - Writ of Mandamus - Petition filed to declare the inaction of police in not registering a crime against certain respondents as illegal and arbitrary - The petitioner alleged encroachment and assault by respondents, but police found the matter to be civil in nature and advised amicable settlement. (Paras 1, 3)
(B) Legal Obligation - The court emphasized the necessity for law enforcement to act on complaints, but acknowledged the police's discretion in determining the nature of disputes. (Paras 3, 5)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner claimed that respondents encroached on his property and assaulted him, leading to a complaint that was not acted upon by the police.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the police had conducted an inquiry and determined the matter to be civil, advising the parties to settle amicably.
Issues: The main issue was whether the police's inaction constituted a violation of the petitioner's rights under the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while the police have a duty to act, they also have the discretion to classify disputes as civil and advise parties accordingly.
Result: Writ Petition disposed of.
The Court made the following:
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed seeking indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction of respondents particularly respondent No.4 in not registering crime on the complaint of the Petitioner dated 02.09.2024 against the respondents 5 to 9 under the provisions of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 on the file of respondent No.4 and declare the same as illegal, irregular, arbitrary and unjust and amounts to non-discharge of legal obligation conferred on the part of respondents under the provisions of the Bharalya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhitha 2023 and violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India.
2. Heard Sri Muchakayala Narayana, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents. Perused the material on record.
3. When the matter is taken up, learned Assistant Government Pleader placed on record the Written Instructions dated 21.02.2025 given by the respondent No.4 to the effect that the matter is purely related to the civil in nature. For better appreciation, Written Instructions dated 20.02.2025 is extracted hereunder:
It is submitted that, the present writ petitioner has filed the petition in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the in action of respondents, particularly 4th respondent in not registering the crime on his complaint dated 2.9.2024 against the respondents 5 to 9 under the provisions of Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha-2023, on the file of 4th respondent and declare the same as illegal, irregular, arbitrary and un justice and amounts to non-discharge of legal obligation conferred on the part of respondents under the provisions of the Bharathiya Nyaya Sanhitha-2023 and offends Articles 14,21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and pass other or orders as this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case.
It is submitted that, the present writ petitioner previously filed a petition in the nature of writ of mandamus vide writ petition number 25104 OF 2024 before this Hon’ble court, with the same subject matter, for that we filed instructions before this Hon’ble court.
It is submitted that, the main grievance of the writ petitioner is that the petitioner is having an extent of Ac.3.89 Cents of house site property covered by Survey No.60/1 and same was situated in at Ramapuram village in Pichatur Mandal of Tirupathi District. The respondents 5 to 9 who are belongs to the village of petitioner at Ramapuram intentionally, known fully and having evil intention encroached the pathway passing on the south side of the street and thereby got installed the septic tank, water tank and encroached the asbestos roof in his absence, while the petitioner was at Tirupati and in order to make trouble to him. On 28.8.2024 at about 11 AM while the petitioner along with his workers went to his house site, the respondents 5 to 9 scolded the petitioner and his worker, attack on them. It is submitted that, on 2.9.2024 the petitioner reported the above incident before 4th respondent herein to take penal action on the respondents 5 to 9, but received his complaint and didn’t initiate any action against the respondents 5 to 9 till now.
It is submitted that the facts of the case is that the petitioner has given a representation in the PGRS Portal vide Petition ID No.JRPI/PCTR/020924/00031 dated 02.09.2024 and further after receipt of the same was endorsed to the SHO Pichatur PS for taking necessary action in accordance of law, and further the SHO Pichatur has called the both the parties for preliminary enquiry, further the both the parties are appeared before the SHO Pichatur and after conducting the enquiry as the matter is purely related to the civil disputes in respect of the encroachments and also it came to light that, no attacks were taken place on the alleged date of offence, except the wordy altercation between both part
