#Police Jurisdiction

Andhra Pradesh High Court holds that police officers have no authority under Clause 20(a) of the AP Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order 2018 to seize vehicles carrying essential commodities like rice. The ruling sets aside arbitrary seizures, reinforces natural justice, and directs immediate release of confiscated goods, impacting transporters and law enforcement agencies under the Essential Commodities Act.

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that police have no legal authority to issue status quo directions in private property disputes, as such orders fall exclusively within the domain of civil courts. This decision reinforces that law enforcement must confine itself to maintaining public order, not adjudicating title or possession claims - a critical safeguard for property owners facing coercive administrative interference.

Andhra Pradesh High Court holds that police lack jurisdiction to summon parties in civil disputes, such as land acquisition compensation, without following statutory remedies under the Land Acquisition Act, 2013. The ruling reinforces that writ petitions under Article 226 are the appropriate recourse for aggrieved parties, preventing arbitrary police interference in civil matters.

Andhra Pradesh High Court rules that police interference in civil disputes, including pressuring parties to settle financial matters, is illegal and violates Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court issued a writ of mandamus directing police to refrain from such actions, reinforcing the boundary between civil and criminal jurisdiction.

Punjab and Haryana High Court holds that cross-border arrests under NDPS Act require prior information and jurisdictional compliance; acquittal upheld due to procedural violation.