Telangana High Court

Mohammed Zubair vs The State Of Telangana, on 13 March, 2024

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

              WRIT PETITION No.27471 of 2023

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:-

"...to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.4 in opening and maintaining suspect sheet against petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1) (e) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct Respondent No.4 to close the suspect sheet against petitioner and further this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct Respondent Nos.4 and 5 herein to not harass the Petitioner..."

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

implicated in Crime No.289 of 2020, registered for the offence

under Section 188 of I.P.C., Section 3 of the Epidemic Disease

Act, 2005 and Section 51 (B) of Disaster Management Act,

2005 and the same is pending. It is the further case of the

petitioner that except the above said crime no crimes are

pending against him in any police station as on date.

However, basing on the alleged offences, the respondents

opened suspect sheet against him. The main grievance of the

petitioner is that the respondents with a mala fide intention

are continuing the rowdy sheet and due to surveillance, he is

facing much inconvenience and hardship to lead a

respectable and dignified life in the society.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed respondent No.3

stating that the petitioner is involved in a case in Crime

No.289 of 2020, registered for the offences under Section 188

of I.P.C., Section 3 of the Epidemic Disease Act, 2005 and

Section 51 (B) of Disaster Management Act, 2005 and the

same is pending. It is also stated that basing on the

instructions issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police,

Malkajgiri Division, rowdy sheet has been opened against the

petitioner on the file of Nacharam Police Station vide

No.166/Suspect Sheet/ACP-M/RK/2020, dated 11.11.2020

and the same is being maintained against the petitioner. It is

further stated that to curb and curtail the unlawful activities

of the petitioner, a rowdy sheet was opened against him to

watch his movements from time to time in the public interest

as per Standing Order No.601 of A.P. Police Manual.

Reference has been made to the Circular No.2172/C13/

SCRB/CID/TS/22 dated 22.07.2022 issued by the Director

General of Police, Hyderabad, which prescribes the procedure

for opening the rowdy sheets against the habitual offenders. It

is also stated that there is no case registered against the

petitioner after closure of the aforesaid criminal cases.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as

on date, except solitary crime 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 others1 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

AIR 1963 SC 1295

AIR 1984 SC 1334

valid reason would not characterize a person that he is

habitually involving in commission of offences.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the

judgments in Sunkara Satyanarayana v. State of Andhra

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, Vijayawada7,

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.

2000(1) ALD (Crl.) 117 (AP)

2004(1) ALD (Crl.) 387 (AP)

1987(2) ALT 904

1997(6) ALD 583

1998(3) ALT 55 (DB)

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.

7. It is apt to refer to the relevant Standing Orders of A.P.

Police Manual.

8. 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.

2020(2) ALD (Crl.) 1048 (AP)

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, 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"'

9. 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."

10. 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 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."

11. In the present case, as per the counter-affidavit, except

solitary crime there are no criminal cases pending against the

petitioner as on date to maintain the suspect 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 subsequent to the

closure/acquittal of the criminal cases registered against him.

12. In view of the above and inasmuch as in catena of

cases, the Courts are consistently directing the police to