##PAGE1##

2026:APHC:32378 APHC010121462026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3209]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

WRIT PETITION NO: 6944 OF 2026 Between:

1. P YLA SUBHASH CHANDRA BOSE, S/O SATYANARAYANA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O. D. NO. 10-03-254, THOTA VEEDHI, YELESWARAM, KAKINADA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-533429.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE ANDHRA PRADESH INFORMATION COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER, 1ST FLOOR, MGM CAPITAL, CHINNAKAKANI, MANGALAGIRI,

GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522503.

2. P UBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR URBAN DISTRICT ANDHRA

PRADESH-522503, 3. P UBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL

OF POLICE ELURU RANGE, ELURU - 534007

4. P UBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DIST.,

ANDHRA PRADESH-533003.

5. I NSPECTOR OF POLICE, PRATHIPADU CIRCLE, PRATHIPADU KAKINADA DISTRICT - 533432.

6. T HE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, YELESWARAM, KAKINADA DIST, ANDHRA PRADESH-533432.

2

2026:APHC:32378

7. T HE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, PRATHIPADU POLICE STATION, KAKINADA DIST ANDHRA PRADESH-533432.

8. T HE SUBINSPECTOR OF POLICE, YELESWARAM POLICE STATION, KAKINADA DIST, A.P.-533429.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. CKR ASSOCIATES Represented by Mr.Goli GVS Sai.

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. GP FOR HOME

2. Mr.K.Giridhar, Advocate representing Mr.K.Ramesh Babu, Standing Counsel for RTI.

3

2026:APHC:32378 The Court made the following ORDER:

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is non- disposal of the Second Appeal preferred under the provisions of RTI Act.

2) Seeking the CCTV footages dated 18.09.2025, 19.09.2025, 20.09.2025 and 21.09.2025, recorded in Yeleswaram and Prathipadu Police Stations, the petitioner made an application under the provisions of RTI Act to the Public Information Officer, on 03.11.2025 and since the same did not yield any response, the petitioner filed the First Appeal and the same also did not yield any response, therefore, he filed the Second Appeal before the 1^st

respondent.

3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the said Second Appeal is filed on 08.01.2026, so far the same has not been taken up for consideration. He also submits that if the CCTV Footages referred to above are not preserved during the pendency of the Second Appeal, the whole purpose of seeking information under the RTI Act would be rendered futile. He also submits that under the said circumstances, the petitioner is

constrained to file the present Writ Petition.

4) Learned Assistant Government Pleader, placed a copy of the instructions dated 24.03.2026, received from the 5^th respondent for perusal of this Court and submits that as per the information furnished by the Nodal Officer, Police Control Room, Kakinada, the CC Footage of Prathipadu P.S. is available for 106 days i.e., from 09.12.2025 till date and CCTV Footage of

4

2026:APHC:32378 Yeleswaram P.S., available for 122 days i.e., from 23.11.2025 till date. He submits that in the said circumstances, the request for furnishing the CCTV

footage as sought for by the petitioner is not possible.

5) In the light of the grievance ventilated in the present Writ Petition, this

Court deems it not necessary to consider the matter in detail.

6) The learned counsel representing the 1^st respondent on instructions submits that the S.A.No.30 of 2026 filed by the petitioner stands posted for

hearing on 06.04.2026.

7) In view of the submission that the Second Appeal is posted for hearing on 06.04.2026, the Writ Petition is disposed of providing that the 1^st respondent shall pass appropriate orders in the said Appeal, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. The petitioner is at liberty to raise all the issues before the Appellate Authority, including the submission made by the le