The High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed a writ petition as infructuous without adjudicating the substantive legal issue of mandamus against police inaction in implementing a civil court’s injunction. This order neither creates nor clarifies binding precedent, and the writ’s dismissal does not alter the existing legal position on police aid or enforcement of civil decrees.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WP/41532/2022 of KUPARLA DEMUDU @ CHANTI Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh |
| CNR | APHC010702922022 |
| Date of Registration | 22-12-2022 |
| Decision Date | 03-11-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS |
| Judgment Author | Dr. Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa |
| Court | High Court of Andhra Pradesh |
| Precedent Value | No precedential value; does not decide questions of law |
| Type of Law | Constitutional Law (Article 226), Police inaction, Civil Procedure |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The petition was dismissed as infructuous upon petitioner’s submission that the claim no longer survived. The court made no findings or observations on the substantive legal issues raised, including mandamus to enforce a civil injunction through police aid or registration of FIR based on alleged inaction. The dismissal was purely procedural and does not affect or decide upon the legal principles pertaining to these issues. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The writ was filed challenging inaction by the police in enforcing an injunction decree and seeking FIR registration, but was dismissed at the petitioner’s request after the plea became infructuous. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | Not binding; does not serve as authority |
| Persuasive For | Not persuasive; no legal issue answered |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The court did not rule on the substantive legal questions raised regarding mandamus, police inaction, or implementation of a civil injunction.
- Dismissal as infructuous implies there is no precedent set on merits; such cases cannot be cited as authority for substantive points of law.
- Petitions declared infructuous at the petitioner’s instance do not affect existing jurisprudence on the enforcement of civil decrees through police or initiation of criminal proceedings for violation.
- Lawyers should not rely on this order for any proposition regarding mandamus or enforcement of civil injunctions.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- Upon coming up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the writ petition had become infructuous.
- The court recorded this submission and dismissed the writ as infructuous.
- No consideration or adjudication occurred on the merits of the petition.
- There is no discussion, reasoning, or application of substantive law pertaining to Article 226, police inaction, or enforcement of civil decrees through police aid.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Sought writ of mandamus against police inaction on complaints despite existence of a civil injunction.
- Requested direction for registration of FIR and for police aid in enforcing the civil court decree.
- At hearing, submitted that the relief sought had become infructuous.
Respondents
- Appearance by Assistant Government Pleader for Home (no substantive arguments recorded due to petitioner’s submission).
Factual Background
- The petitioner obtained an injunction decree in O.S.No.196/2018 from the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-JMFC, Narsipatnam.
- Alleged inaction by police (respondent No.4) in acting on complaints lodged on 15-10-2022 and 01-11-2022 regarding violation of the injunction decree.
- Sought mandamus for registration of FIR and implementation of the injunction by police aid.
- The petition was dismissed as infructuous due to the petitioner’s submission at hearing.
Statutory Analysis
- The petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking mandamus.
- No statutory analysis, interpretation, or application is contained in the judgment due to dismissal as infructuous.
Procedural Innovations
None recorded; standard procedure for dismissal as infructuous upon petitioner’s request.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Dismissal as infructuous in routine; no law declared or overruled.