Telangana High Court
Syed Khaleel Kala Khaleel vs The State Of Telangana on 14 October, 2022
Bench: B.Vijaysen Reddy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.26911 of 2022
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a rowdy
sheet was opened against the petitioner vide proceeding
No.200/CGPS/2006, dated 15.06.2006 by Assistant Commissioner
of Police, Falaknuma Division.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that initially he was accused in
only one crime i.e,. Crime No.41 of 2005 for the offences
U/sec.120-B,302,201 and 212 IPC r/w 34 IPC. In the said case
charge sheet was filed, petitioner was tried in S.C.No.464 of 2008
and was acquitted vide judgment dated 12.01.2010.
4. The petitioner was later involved in three more offences
mentioned as under;
1. Cr.No. 293 of 2009 registered for the offences under
Section 302,120-B,201, 109 r/w 34 IPC and Section
25 and 27 of Arms Act of P.S.Chandrayangutta.
2. Cr.No.211 of 2009 registered for the offences under
Sections 302, 201,120-B, 109 IPC and Section 25
and 27 Arms Act.
3. Cr.No.161 of 2011 registered for the offence under
Sections 25 (1) Arms Act & Sec.20 (b) NDPS Act.
5. In all the above first two cases, charge sheets were filed and
petitioner was tried before the Sessions Court in SC.No.528 of
2012, S.C.No.103 of 2011 and the third case was tried before
Magistrate in C.C.No.721 of 2013. All the three matters ended in
acquittal vide judgments dated 18.07.2013, 01.08.2014 and
19.09.2018 respectively.
6. In the counter filed by the respondents, it is stated that
rowdy sheet was opened against the petitioner on the file of
P.S.Chandrayangutta was continued until January,2012 and on the
point of jurisdiction, rowdy sheet was transferred to P.S. Amangal,
Mahabubnagar District and rowdy sheet was continued and
renewed from time to time till 31.12.2022.
7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits
that subsequently, petitioner was involved in five (5) crimes i.e,.
(1) Cr.No.44 of 2019 registered U/sec.107 Cr.PC during parliament
elections. (2) Cr.No.06 of 2020 registered U/sec. 107 Cr.P.C during
Municipal Elections. (3) Cr.No.199 of 2020, registered U/sec.151
Cr.P.C for involving in Government land issue (Market Yard issue) in
Amangal town and (4) Cr.No.199 of 2020, registered U/sec.151
Cr.P.C in connection of a protest programme at New Delhi in
support of farmers and (5) Cr.No.97 of 2020 registered U/sec. 107
Cr.P.C in connection with elections of Jama Mazid.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the above
referred crimes registered between 2019-2020 Under sections
107,151 Cr.P.Cs are petty cases which does not warrant opening of
rowdy sheet. Rowdy sheet was opened against the petitioner
merely on the basis of one crime. Merely because the petitioner was
involved in other offences, subsequently which, the same does not
empower the police to continue the rowdy sheet.
9. It is not in dispute that a rowdy sheet was opened against
the petitioner in the year 2006 for his involvement in Cr.No.45 of
2005 of P.S.Chandrayangutta which is ended in acquittal in
SC.No.464 of 2008 vide judgment dated 12.01.2010 only.
Subsequent three cases registered against the petitioner as referred
in paragraph No.4 above ended in acquittal. Thus, continuation of
rowdy sheet renewing it from time to time even when petitioner
was acquitted in the above cases is arbitrary and violative of article
21 of the Indian Constitution. So far as involvement of petitioner in
recent crimes is concerned, it is not the case of the respondents
that rowdy sheet is being continued for in the new five cases
registered under Sections 107, 151 Cr.PC.
10. Prima facie, the said offences are petty offences and in any
event, continuation of rowdy sheet merely because petitioner is
involved in other offences at later point of time is unwarranted.
Learned Counsel for the respondent has not referred to any judicial
precedent or provision of law whereby, the police was entitled to
continue the rowdy sheet on the strength of cases registered at
later point of time.
11. Hence, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are
directed to close the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
____________________
B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J
October 14, 2022
PKR
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.26911 of 2022
October 14, 2022
PKR
