SMT. MADITHADU CHANDRAKALA v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed to follow the due process of law regarding the crime which was registered against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous…
Judgment
Cause title
1. SMT. MADITHADU CHANDRAKALA, W/O RAMANJULU, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE, RESIDENT OF D.NO.38/20- 1, MITTAMEEDAPALLI H/O RAYAVARAM VILLAGE, T.SUNDUPALLI MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT, SECRETARY, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT AT RAYACHOTY.
3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RAYACHOTY, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.
4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, T.SUNDUPALLI POLICE STATION, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT.
5. SRI BETHAPURI NAGARAJA, S/O SIDDAIAH, AGED ABOUT 40 RESIDENT OF THUVVAPALLI YEARS, OCC AGRICULTURE, VILLAGE, K.V.PALLI MANDAL, ANNAMAYYA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S)
: Counsel for the Petitioner: 2
1. VUTUPALLI RAJANNA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
WRIT PETITION NO: 387 of 2024
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer:
…to issue Writ, or Direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in interfering with the construction of residential house in property admeasuring an extent of Ac.0.03 cents in Sy.No.1286, situated in Mittameedapalli H/o Rayavaram Village, T.Sundupalli Mandal, Annamayya District belonging illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and violation of Article 19, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 4th respondent not to interfere with the civil disputes.…
the petitioner
Heard Sri Vutupalli Rajanna, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that basing on the complaint made by the 5th respondent, a case in Cr.No.139 of 2023 under Sections 448, 427, 323 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(r) (s) & 3(2) (va) of SC’s & ST’s (POA) Amendment Act, 2015 was registered against the petitioner and others. Except for the registration of the above crime, the police have never interfered in the civil disputes between the parties.
Operative part
Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed to follow the due process of law regarding the crime which was registered against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. 4 As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 05.12.2025. UPS 292 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.387 of 2024 Dated.05.12.2025 UPS
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 05 Dec 2025. The bench was VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.