Monday, 13, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mohd Yakhub Alias Parvez Patel vs The State Of Telangana
2024 Latest Caselaw 1252 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 1252 Tel
Judgement Date : 22 March, 2024

Telangana High Court

Mohd Yakhub Alias Parvez Patel vs The State Of Telangana on 22 March, 2024

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

              WRIT PETITION No.37789 of 2021

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed praying this Court to declare

the action of the respondents in opening the rowdy sheet

against the petitioner, as being illegal, arbitrary,

unconstitutional and violative of Article 21 of the

Constitution of India and consequently direct the

respondents to close the rowdy sheet opened against the

petitioner.

2. The case of the petitioner is that two crimes have

been registered him for various offences, namely (i) Crime

No.284 of 2021, for the offences under Section 447 and

427 of I.P.C. and (ii) Crime No.4 of 2019, for the offences

under Sections 447, 506, 323 and 365 read with 34 of the

Indian Penal Code. Out of the above crimes, Crime No.4 of

2019 was withdrawn by the complainant and as such

except Crime No.284 of 2021, no criminal cases are

pending against him in any police station as on date. The

main grievance of the petitioner is that, though except one

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

solitary crime there are no criminal cases pending against

him, 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 by respondent No.4

stating that the petitioner was involved in as many as six

cases and the particulars of which are as under:-

Sl. Crime No and offences SC/CC No. Remarks No.

1. Cr.No.25 of 2019, C.C.No.4950 of Pending for trial under Section 379 of 2020 I.P.C.

2. Cr.No.467 of 2018, C.C.No.12596 Pending for trial under Sections 447 of 2020 and 506 read with 34 of I.P.C.

3. Cr.No.134 of 2018, C.C.No.12850 Pending for trial under Sections 448 of 2020 and 507 read with 34 of I.P.C.

4. Cr.No.462 of 2018, C.C.No.12600 Pending for trial under Sections 447, of 2020 427 and 506 read with 34 of I.P.C.

5. Cr.No.4 of 2019, under C.C.No.2515 of Pending for trial Sections 447, 506, 323 2021 and 365 read with 34 of I.P.C.

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

6. Cr.No.284 of 2021, -- Pending under Sections 447, 427 and 143 read with 34 of I.P.C.

4. It is also stated that basing on the instructions

issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Rajendra

Nagar Division, Cyberabad Unit, rowdy sheet has been

opened against the petitioner on the file of Rajendranagar

Police Station vide No.18/Rowdy Sheet/ACP-

RN/Cyb/2021, dated 27.08.2021. Later the rowdy sheet

was transferred to Hussaini Alam Police Station,

Hyderabad through proper channel for maintaining and

close surveillance of the petitioner vide

No.113/IN/HAL/Hyd.2021, dated 20.12.2021 and the

same is being maintained against him as on date. It is

further stated that the petitioner is creating nuisance with

the general public, but due to fear no body came forward to

lodge complaint against him. It is further stated that only

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

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

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.

5. A reply affidavit filed has been filed by the petitioner

stating that except Crime No.284 of 2021, no cases are

pending against him. It is stated that the proceedings in

C.C.No.4950 of 2020 arising out of Crime No.25 of 2019

were quashed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.8626 of

2021, dated 06.01.2022. In Crime No.467 of 2018, the

petitioner has not been arrayed as an accused and one

Irfan Patel and Mohd. Zubair are shown as the accused.

Insofar as C.C.No.2515 of 2021 arising out of Crime No.4 of

2019 is concerned, the proceedings have been quashed by

this Court vide order, dated 16.02.2023 in Criminal

Petition No.3211 of 2022. The proceedings in

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

C.C.No.12600 of 2020 arising out of Crime No.462 of 2018

are also quashed by this Court in Criminal Petition

No.8625 of 2021, dated 20.12.2021. It is further stated

that the proceedings in Crime No.248 of 2021 were

quashed in Criminal Petition No.508 of 2022, dated

04.01.2023. The said orders were filed before this Court

along with the reply copies.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

except a solitary case 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.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied

on the judgments in Sunkara Satyanarayana v. State of

1 AIR 1963 SC 1295 2 AIR 1984 SC 1334

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

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,

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.

8. 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

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)

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

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.

9. It is apt to refer to the relevant Standing Orders of

A.P. Police Manual.

10. 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.

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

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"'

11. 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

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

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."

12. 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;

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

(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."

13. In the present case, as per the material available on

record, except the solitary case 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 respondents have not given any specific

instance of the petitioner's involvement in the commission

of offence subsequently.

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

14. 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.

15. 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.

16. 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.

CVBR, J W.P.NO.37789 OF 2021

17. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed.

There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous

applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.

________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 22nd March 2024 RRB

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter