A writ of police protection under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is permissible to effectuate rights already crystallized by a decree or a clear interlocutory order of a competent Civil Court, provided the court is not asked to adjudicate complex disputed questions of fact.

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“…to issue a Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 3 in not providing police protection to the petitioner in implementing the judgement and decree dated 22. 09. 2025 passed O. S. No. 92 of 2015 on the file of Honble Junior Civil Judge Vayalpad disregarding my representation dated 09. 12. 2025 as illegal arbitrary and in violation of Articles 21 and 300A of The Constitution Of India and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to provide police protection to the petitioner in respect of the land to an extent of Ac. 0.5 ½ cents in Sy No. 41-2/A an extent of Ac. 0.09 ½ cents in Sy.No. 45-1 an extent of Ac.6.96 cents in Sy. No. 189 an extent of Ac. 0. 05 cents in Sy. No. 190-1 an extent of Ac.2.00 cents in Sy.No.190-2 an extent of Ac.0.15 cents and 0.96 cents in Sy.No.191 an extent of Ac.3.17 cents in Sy.No.192/5 situated at Amilepalle Village Gurramkonda Mandal Annamaiah District and pass…”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader.

3. Mr. V. Dhushyanth Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that a judgment and decree were passed in favour of the petitioner against respondent Nos.4 to 9, granting permanent injunction restraining respondent Nos.4 to 9 from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property by the petitioner. Despite the said judgment and decree, respondent Nos.4 to 9 are allegedly interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by the petitioner. Therefore, respondent Nos.1 to 3 are required to provide necessary police protection to the petitioner for enjoyment of the property in terms of the said judgment and decree.

4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that the grievance of the petitioner relates to seeking police protection in respect of the subject lands situated at Amilepalle Village, Gurramkonda Mandal, Annamaiah District, based on the judgment and decree dated 22.09.2025 passed in O.S.No.92 of 2015. He further submits that the petitioner had submitted a representation dated 09.12.2026 before the 3rd respondent alleging interference by respondent Nos.4 to 9 with the subject property. It is submitted that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature concerning property rights and possession. The learned Assistant Government Pleader further submits that the police ordinarily do not interfere in civil disputes unless there exists any cognizable offence or a specific direction from a competent Court. However, he submits that if any direction is issued by this Court, the respondent police would act in accordance with law and provide necessary protection.

5. A learned Single Judge of this Court, in Vanaparthi Subramanyam v. State of Andhra Pradesh , W.P.No.20555 of 2022 at paragraph No.11, observed that where a decree of permanent injunction has been granted by a competent Civil Court, the plaintiff therein is entitled to seek police aid either from the Civil Court which passed the decree or from this Court by invoking its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This view was taken by placing reliance on the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Rai Naramma v. State of Andhra Pradesh , 2021 (1) ALT 426

6. In this connection, it is also appropriate to r