JAVVAJI RANGAIAH v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 09 Dec 2025
- Bench
- VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Outcome
Disposed of
Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed to follow due process of law relating to the crime which has been registered against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel…
Judgment
Cause title
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 4th respondent not to dispossess the petitioner from the property to an extent of Ac 1-25 cents in D.No.19/ 1 of Gogulapadu village, Rompicherla mandal, Palnadu district at respondents 5 to 9 herien pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interests of justice. instance of Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. G V S MEHAR KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
2. SOMISETTY GANESH BABU The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
WRIT PETITION NO: 29869 of 2023
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for:
…pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action the 4th respondent in interfering with the civil disputes at the instance of the respondents 5 to 9 and trying to dispossess the petitioner from the property to an extent of Ac 1-25 cents in D.No.19/1, Gogulapadu village, Rompicherla mandal, Palnadu district without considering the Civil Cases as well as Writ Petition in W.P.No.21498/2022 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of principals of natural justice and consequently direct the 4th respondent not to interfere with the civil disputes for settlement and to pass such.…
Heard Sri G.V.S. Mehar Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions would submit that based on the complaint lodged by respondent No.4, a case in Cr.No.212 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, r/w 34 of IPC was registered against the petitioner and others. He would further submit that the police are not interfering in the civil disputes between petitioner and the unofficial respondents.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of.
Operative part
Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the police are directed to follow due process of law relating to the crime which has been registered against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 09.12.2025. TVN 109 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.29869 of 2023 Dated.09.12.2025 TVN
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151; Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 09 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.