Telangana High Court
Abdul Hameed Khan vs The State Of Telangana on 24 January, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.32151 of 2023
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondent Nos.5 and 6 in opening and continuing the rowdy sheet against the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct respondent No.6 to close the rowdy sheet opened against him.
2. The petitioner states that in the year 2022 the police of Bhavani Nagar Police Station, Hyderabad, registered a case in Crime No.224 of 2022 against him for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120-B read with 34 IPC, wherein charge sheet was filed vide PRC.No.187 of 2023 and the same is pending on the file of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The case of the petitioner is that based on the alleged offences, respondent No.5 opened a rowdy sheet against him on 09.01.2023 and subsequently it was transferred to I.S.Sadan Police Station, Hyderabad, respondent No.6 herein. The main grievance of the petitioner is that even though there are no other criminal cases pending against him, except the aforesaid single case which is pending trial, respondent No.6 with a mala fide intention is continuing the rowdy sheet and due to surveillance, he is facing much 2 inconvenience and hardship to lead a respectable and dignified life in the society.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Santoshnagar Division, Hyderabad, stating inter alia that the Station House Officer, Bhavaninagar Police Station, registered a case in Crime No.224 of 2022 against the petitioner and two others wherein the accused were sent to judicial custody and thereafter charge sheet was filed before the Court of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and the same is pending for trial vide PRC.No.187 of 2023. It is further stated that in view of involvement of the petitioner in the above criminal case, in order to curb and curtail the unlawful activities of the petitioner, as per the proceedings issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Santoshnagar Division, vide proceedings No.62/OW/ACP- STN/2023 dated 09.01.2023, rowdy sheet has been opened against the petitioner, to watch his movements from time to time in the public interest as per Standing Order No.601 of A.P.Police Manual, and subsequently on 02.06.2023 it was transferred to I.S.Sadan Police Station, Hyderabad, on the point of jurisdiction. Reference has also been made to the Circular issued by the Director General of Police, Hyderabad, vide C.No.2172/C13/SCRB/CID/TS/22 dated 22.07.2022 which prescribes the procedure for opening and continuing the rowdy sheets 3 against the habitual offenders. It is also stated that on 10.07.2023 the Special Executive Magistrate, Hyderabad, vide MC.No.560/2023 bound over the petitioner for keeping good behavior for a period of one year and he executed a bond of Rs.50,000/- to the said effect. It is further stated that in view of pendency of PRC.No.187 of 2023, retaining the rowdy sheet is essential to watch the activities of the petitioner and as such prayed this Hon'ble Court to dismiss the writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that except a solitary case which is pending trial, there are no cases pending against the petitioner and therefore, prayed to close the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner. In support of his submission, he has relied upon the judgment in Kharak Singh v. State of U.P. and others 1 and Vijay Narain Singh v. State of Bihar 2, in which, the Apex Court held that opening of rowdy sheet and continuing the same without any valid reason would not characterize a person that he is habitually involving in commission of offences.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied on the judgments in Sunkara Satyanarayana v. State of Andhra Pradesh 3; B. 1 AIR 1963 SC 1295 2 AIR 1984 SC 1334 3 2000(1) ALD (Crl.) 117 (AP) 4 Satyanarayana Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh 4 ; Majid Babu v. Government of Andhra Pradesh 5 ; Kamma Bapuji v. Station House Officer, Brahmasamudram 6. He has further relied on the judgment in Puttagunta Pasi v. Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada 7, in which, the Division Bench has specifically observed that a rowdy sheet could not be opened against an individual in a casual and mechanical manner and due care and caution should be taken by the police before characterizing a person as a rowdy.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed much reliance on the judgment in Yerramsetti Venugopal Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others 8, in which, the learned Single Judge of High Court of Andhra Pradesh while referring to the Standing Orders of A.P. Police Manual and the principles laid down in the catena of judgments held that history sheet of a rowdy can be continued (i) if the activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order or affecting peace and tranquility in the area; ii) the victims are not coming forward to give complaint against him on account of threat from him.
4 2004(1) ALD (Crl.) 387 (AP) 5 1987(2) ALT 904 6 1997(6) ALD 583 7 1998(3) ALT 55 (DB) 8 2020(2) ALD (Crl.) 1048 (AP) 5
7. It is apt to refer to the relevant Standing Orders of A.P. Police Manual.
Maintenance of rowdy sheets is governed by Standing Order No.601 of A.P. Police Manual, Part-I, Volume II, which reads as under:
"601. The following persons may be classified as rowdies and Rowdy Sheets (Form 80) may be opened for them under the orders of the SP/DCP and ACP/SDPO.
A. Persons who habitually commit, attempt to commit or abet the commission of offences involving a breach of the peace, disturbance to public order and security.
B. Persons bound over under Sections 106, 107, 108(1) (i) and 110(e) and (g) of Cr.P.C.
C. Persons who have been convicted more than once in two consecutive years under sections 59 and 70 of the Hyderabad City Police Act or under section 3, clause 12, of the AP Towns Nuisances Act.
D. Persons who habitually tease women and girls and pass indecent remarks.
F. Persons who intimidate by threats or use of physical violence or other unlawful means to part with movable or immovable properties or in the habit of collecting money by extortion from shopkeepers, traders and other residents.
G. Persons who incite and instigate communal/caste or political riots.
H. Persons detained under the "AP Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, 6 Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land-Grabbers Act, 1986" for a period of 6 months or more.
I. Persons who are convicted for offences under the Representatives of the Peoples' Act for rigging and carrying away ballot paper, Boxes and other polling material"'
8. The period of retention of history sheets of suspects/rowdies is governed by Standing Order No.602 of A.P. Police Manual and the same reads as follows:
"602-1. History Sheets of suspects shall be maintained from the date of registration up to the end of December, after which the orders of a gazetted officer as to their discontinuance or retention for a further period shall be obtained.
2. Merely because a suspect/rowdy, having a history sheet, is not figuring as accused in the previous 5 years after the last case in which he was involved, it should not preclude the SP/DCP/CP to continue his history sheet if SP/DCP/CP is of the considered view that his activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order or one affecting peace and tranquillity in the area or the victims are not coming forward to give complaint against him on account of threat from him."
9. Standing Order No.742 of A.P. Police Manual deals with the classification of rowdies and opening of rowdy sheets and the same is extracted below:
"742. Rowdies:- (1) The following persons may be classified as rowdies and Rowdy Sheets (Form 88) may be opened for them 7 under the order of the Superintendent of Police or Sub-divisional Officer:
(a) persons who habitually commit, attempt to commit or abet the commission of, offences involving a breach of the peace;
(b) persons bound over under Sections 106, 107, 108(c) and 110(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No.2 of 1974);
(c) persons who have been convicted more than once in two consecutive years under Section 75 of the Madras City Police Act or under Section 3, clause 12, of the Towns Nuisances Act;
(d) persons who habitually tease women and girls by passing indecent remarks or otherwise; and
(e) in the case of rowdies residing in an area under one Police Station but are found to be frequently visiting the area under one or more other Police Stations their rowdy sheets can be maintained at all such Police Stations;
(G.O. Ms. No. 656, Home (Police-D) Dept. Dt. 8-4-1971) (2) Instructions in Order 735 regarding discontinuance of History Sheets shall also apply to Rowdy Sheets."
10. In the present case, as per the counter-affidavit, except the solitary case which is pending trial, there are no cases pending against the petitioner as on date to maintain the rowdy sheet or to keep surveillance on the activities of the petitioner in any manner. However, it is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner is a habitual offender and there is every possibility of threat to the public at large. Further, the 8 respondents have not given any specific instance of the petitioner's involvement in the commission of offence subsequently.
11. It is settled legal position that involvement of a person in a solitary criminal case is not sufficient to classify such a person as a habitual offender under Clause (A) of Standing Order 601 of A.P.Police Manual.
12. In view of the above settled legal position and inasmuch as in catena of cases, the Courts are consistently directing the police to maintain the rowdy sheet as per the Standing Orders of A.P. Police Manual, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the opening of the rowdy sheet in the name of the petitioner and continuance of the same thereafter is in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India.
13. Therefore, the respondents police are directed to close the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner. It is needless to observe that if the petitioner involves in any crime in future and if there is any sufficient material to establish that his movements are required to be prevented, the respondents police are at liberty to take action against him strictly in accordance with the Standing Orders of A.P. Police Manual.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed.
9Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 24.01.2024 JSU/SCS