Telangana High Court

Nirugonda Abhishek Goud vs The State Of Telangana And 4 Others on 9 February, 2024

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

               WRIT PETITION NO.7015 OF 2023

ORDER:

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking to declare the

action of the fourth respondent in opening Suspect/Rowdy

Sheet against the petitioner on the file of the fourth respondent,

as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the

Constitution of India and consequently, to direct the official

respondents to drop all further proceedings by

removing/withdrawing Suspect/Rowdy Sheet against the

petitioner.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was falsely implicated

as accused in four cases on the file of the Station House Officer,

P.S. Kukatpally in the year 2017 for the offence of morphing,

out of which, two cases were acquitted and two cases are

pending. Out of the two cases pending, one case was disposed

of acquitting the petitioner and in another case also compromise

talks are going on, which would be fructified. It is the further

case of the petitioner that from the year 2018 till today, no

cases are registered against him in any Police Station and on

that ground itself, it can be said that he is not a habitual

offender. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that, as per the 2 CVBR,J W.P.NO.7015 OF 2023

Standing Order 742, if a person is not involved in any criminal

case preceding five years, the police officials are under statutory

duty to reconsider continuation of rowdy sheet against him but

though there are no cases pending against him, the respondent-

authorities are calling him to the Police Station frequently and

making him sit hours together from morning to evening which is

disturbing his privacy and offending his rights.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the fourth

respondent herein, inter aila stating that the petitioner is an

unlawful character locally and continuously indulging in

commission of lawless acts involving breach of public peace and

tranquility. It is submitted that as per the records available, the

petitioner is involved in the following criminal cases:

(i) Crime No.320/2012 under Sections 341, 324, 427

read with Section 34 IPC of Malkajgiri Police Station,

Rachakonda Commissionerate, which ended in compromise on

25.03.2013 before the Lok Adalath vide C.C.No.311/2013.

(ii) Crime No.542/2017 under Section 292 IPC and

Sections 66E and 67 of the I.T. Act of Cyber Crime Police

Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate, which ended in

acquittal on 30.07.2021 vide C.C.No.4907/2018.

3 CVBR,J W.P.NO.7015 OF 2023

(iii) Crime No.553/2017 under Sections 292, 201, 354D

and 507 IPC, Sections 66E and 67 of the I.T. Act of Cyber Crime

Police Station, Rachakonda Commisionerate, which ended in

acquittal on 30.07.2021 vide C.C.No.4908/2018.

(iv) Crime No.675/2018 under Sections 341 and 332 IPC

of Malkajgiri Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate,

which is pending trial vide C.C.No.510/2019.

(v) Crime No.676/2018 under Sections 341, 307, 506,

147 and 148 read with 149 IPC of Malkajgiri Police Station,

Rachakonda Commissionerate, which ended in acquittal on

22.07.2022 vide C.C.No.510 /2019.

(vi) Bind-over case vide C.No.18/2023, dated 02.03.2023.

It is further submitted that, in view of involvement of the

petitioner in the above criminal cases, opening a rowdy sheet

against the petitioner has become incumbent on the part of the

police to keep a watch on his activities and to curtail unlawful

activities and as per the proceedings of the Assistant

Commissioner of Police, Malkajgiri Division, Rachakonda

Commissionerate vide C.No.154/Rowdysheet/ACP-

M/RCK/2018, dated 31.12.2018, rowdy sheet has been opened

against the petitioner and it is continuing till date. In order to

curtail the petitioner from involving in unlawful activities and to 4 CVBR,J W.P.NO.7015 OF 2023

watch his movements from time to time in the larger public

interest, the rowdy sheet/suspect sheet is being continued. It is

further submitted that the prayer of the petitioner seeking

closure of the rowdy sheet against him is incorrect, false,

baseless, far from truth and created for the purpose of filing the

present Writ Petition and there are no grounds to close the

rowdy sheet, as the petitioner may repeat the offence and may

create law and order problem and prayed to dismiss the Writ

Petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

except two criminal cases which are pending for 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

1 AIR 1963 SC 1295 2 AIR 1984 SC 1334 5 CVBR,J W.P.NO.7015 OF 2023

Pradesh 3; B. 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.

3 2000(1) ALD (Crl.) 117 (AP) 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) 6 CVBR,J W.P.NO.7015 OF 2023

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 7 CVBR,J W.P.NO.7015 OF 2023

Offenders, Goondas, 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:

8 CVBR,J W.P.NO.7015 OF 2023

"742. Rowdies:- (1) The following persons may be classified as rowdies and Rowdy Sheets (Form

88) may be opened for them 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

two cases which are pending for trial, there are no cases

pending against the petitioner as on date to maintain the rowdy 9 CVBR,J W.P.NO.7015 OF 2023

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 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

two criminal cases is not sufficient to classify such a person as

a habitual offender under Clause (A) of Standing Order 601 of