The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ordered state police personnel to stop interfering in private civil and property matters, ruling that law enforcement authorities hold no legal jurisdiction to adjudicate ownership claims or pressure litigants into settlements.
In a common ruling issued on October 5 across six separate petitions, Justice Maheswara Rao Kuncheam held that resolving civil conflicts is the exclusive constitutional function of the judiciary. The court affirmed that whenever a competent judicial or quasi-judicial forum is actively addressing a dispute, executive agencies cannot usurp that authority, warning that unauthorized police involvement in civil matters is unconstitutional and unlawful.
Litigants Allege Station Summons and Coercion
The ruling stems from a batch of six petitions recounting various instances of police overreach in disagreements over houses, land, and other real estate. Several petitioners stated that officers summoned them to local police stations repeatedly, attempting to force compromises or settlements in disputes already pending before courts.
Specific grievances presented to the bench included an officer locking a petitioner out of her residence, police pressuring an occupant to vacate a disputed property, and an individual being detained for several hours to extract a compromise. In another case, a petitioner claimed officers threatened her to compel the withdrawal of an active civil lawsuit.
The state government contested the claims during proceedings, denying that the petitioners had been summoned to police stations. State counsel told the court that law enforcement personnel do not involve themselves in civil disagreements unless a cognizable criminal offense has been formally registered.
Colonial Framework and Democratic Policing
Addressing the broader institutional background, Justice Kuncheam noted that India’s policing mechanisms continue to reflect their colonial origins under the Police Act of 1861. Drawing on an observation by legal scholar Upendra Baxi that the colonial police survived decolonization by merely changing masters, the court noted that the structural character of the force remained largely unaltered despite the transition from British rule to an elected government.
The court stressed that the nineteenth-century framework was primarily created to control populations and serve rulers rather than deliver citizen-focused public service. Calling on all institutional stakeholders to help shift law enforcement toward democratic and people-centric policing, the bench underscored that police officers are guardians of constitutional values rather than rulers with unchecked authority, and must exercise their powers within legal and proportionate boundaries.
Staffing Deficits and Administrative Directives
The high court also drew attention to severe personnel shortages within Andhra Pradesh, pointing out that the state has approximately 166.18 police officers per 100,000 citizens. This ratio falls substantially below the United Nations recommendation of 222 officers per lakh population. Justice Kuncheam observed that deploying already stretched police resources to areas outside their legal remit is a futile exercise that risks enabling the illegal and unjust enrichment of individual officers.
While barring civil interventions, the court reaffirmed that police remain obligated to maintain public peace, safeguard lives and property, and initiate lawful preventive steps whenever public order is threatened. Officers also retain full authority to investigate and take action where cognizable criminal offences arise, such as criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery, physical assault, or criminal trespass.
The bench directed the state police apparatus to strictly observe the circular issued by the Andhra Pradesh Director General of Police on October 24, 2025, which explicitly forbids officers from taking sides in land ownership or title disputes. With this directive, the high court disposed of the petitions without costs, closed all pending applications, and advised the parties to seek appropriate remedies before competent civil courts.
