R VENKATA RAMANA REDDY v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Considering the submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 324, 342, 447, 509
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Considering the submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Police are directed to conclude the investigation and file a report according to law before the concerned Court as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two (2) months from the date…
Judgment
Cause title
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more Particularly one in the nature of the writ of mandamus declaring the action of the action of the 4th Respondent in not completing investigation and filing final report into the case in FIR No. 89 of 2023 of Ramakuppam Police Station, Chittoor district is illegal, arbitrary, improper, unconstitutional and against the procedure 2 contemplated under the code of criminal procedure and consequently direct the respondents to complete the investigation in the case in FIR No, 89 of 2023 of Ramakuppam Police Station, Chittoor district and to file final report forthwith as per law and also procedure contemplated under the code of criminal procedure and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. HARINADH NIDAMANURI Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME 3 THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
ORDER:
WRIT PETITION NO: 31898 of 2025 This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for:
…to issue a writ, order or direction more Particularly one in the nature of the writ of mandamus declaring the action of the action of the 4th Respondent in not completing investigation and filing final report into the case in FIR No. 89 of 2023 of Ramakuppam Police Station, Chittoor District is illegal, arbitrary, improper, unconstitutional the procedure the code of criminal procedure and contemplated under consequently direct investigation in the case in FIR No. 89 of 2023 of Ramakuppam Police Station, Chittoor District and to file final report forthwith as per law and also procedure contemplated under the code of criminal procedure and pass.…
and against to complete respondents
Heard Sri Harinadh Nidamanuri, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri V.Farook, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the Respondents.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that though Crime was registered in the year 2023 vide Cr.No.89 of 2023 of Ramakuppam Police Station, Chittoor District, for the offences punishable under Sections 447, 342, 509 and 324 of IPC, the Police did not show any progress in the matter.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home seeks time for getting instructions in this matter. 4
Operative part
Considering the submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Police are directed to conclude the investigation and file a report according to law before the concerned Court as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order, if not already filed by this date. 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: 18.11.2025. UPS 5 53 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.31898 of 2025 Dated.18.11.2025 UPS
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Considering the submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 324, 342, 447, 509.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 18 Nov 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.