Mamidisetti Naga Srinivas, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2022 Latest Caselaw 1060 AP

       HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.V.S.S.SOMAYAJULU


                    W.P.No.24056 of 2021
ORDER:

This writ petition is filed to challenge the action of the

6th respondent in opening Rowdy Sheet No.513 against the

petitioner.

This Court has heard Sri Ponnada Sree Vyas, learned

counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government

Pleader for Home.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the

opening of the rowdy sheet against the petitioner is totally

contrary to the law. The petitioner is an accused only in one

case namely P.O.C.S.O. Sessions Case No.79 of 2016. This

case ended in an acquittal. Learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that after the acquittal by order dated 25.10.2016,

till the filing of the writ petition, the petitioner was not

involved in any crime. Therefore, he submits that branding

the petitioner as a habitual offender is totally contrary to law.

He relies upon a judgment of a learned single Judge passed in

WP.No.634 of 2022 in support of his case.

Learned Government Pleader on the other hand argues

that the petitioner was accused in a serious crime. He also

argues that as per the Andhra Pradesh Police Manual 601, a

person who is accused in such a serious crime like 376 IPC.,

should be kept under constant watch due to public interest.

Therefore, learned Government Pleader justifies the opening

of the rowdy sheet. He relies upon language of the Police

Order 601 to argue that as the petitioner is charge sheeted

under the POCSO Act etc., the same is valid.

The law on the subject is no longer in doubt. A rowdy

sheet is to be opened in a public interest if the accused or the

party is a habitual offender. If there is only one case that is

registered and that has also ended in an acquittal, this Court

is of the opinion that continuing of the rowdy sheet against

him is not sustainable under law. An accused cannot be

called a 'habitual offender'. In WP.No.24672 of 2020 and

WP.No.634 of 2022, learned judges of this Court have taken

an identical view.

As on date, no crime is pending against the petitioner.

The only case against the accused ended in an acquittal. This

is evident from the counter filed also. No material is

produced before this Court to show that the petitioner

indulged in criminal activities thereafter etc. In the opinion of

this Court, therefore, there is no material to sustain the

continuation of the rowdy sheet in the case on hand.

In view of the earlier orders passed by this Court, which

are referred to earlier and for the reasons mentioned in this

order, the writ petition is allowed declaring the action of the

respondent Police in continuing the rowdy sheet against the

petitioner as illegal and unconstitutional. Respondent Police

are hereby directed to immediately close the rowdy sheet

No.513 pending investigation.

With the above direction, the writ petition is allowed.

No order as to costs.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall

stand dismissed.

_________________________ D.V.S.S.SOMAYAJULU, J

Date : 25.02.2022.

KLP