[Cites 13, Cited by 0]
Telangana High Court
Khaja Nayeem Uddin vs The State Of Telangana on 15 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
WRIT PETITION No.38775 of 2025
Date: 15.04.2026
Between:
Khaja Nayeem Uddin
..Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana, rep. by its
Principal Secretary for Home Department,
Secretariat, Hyderabad and five others
..Respondents
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed praying this Court to declare the
action of respondent Nos.5 and 6 in opening and maintaining
rowdy sheet against the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and violative
of Articles 14, 19 (1) (e) and 21 of the Constitution of India and
consequently, prayed for other appropriate reliefs.
2. Heard Mr.Mohd. Muzaferullah Khan, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government
Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents. Perused the
record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
petitioner hails from respectable family and he is a law abiding
citizen and he is doing business. Learned counsel for the
2 EVV, J
Wp_38775_2025
petitioner would further submit that in view of the involvement of
the petitioner in Crime No.76 of 2017, 139 of 2019 and 187 of
2023, a rowdy sheet/surveillance sheet has been maintained
against him. The main grievance of the petitioner is that as on
today, there is only one case pending against the petitioner herein.
However, without considering the said fact and also the procedure
laid down under the A.P.Police Manual, the respondents have
issued the above said rowdy sheet against the petitioner herein and
they are continuing the same which is arbitrary, illegal and also
contrary to the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and
this Court in catena of decisions. Learned counsel would further
submit that under the guise of opening and continuation of rowdy
sheet, the respondents-police are calling the petitioner to the police
station and harassing him by making him to wait in the police
station for hours together. With the said submissions, learned
counsel for the petitioner sought a direction to the respondents to
close the above said rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner.
4. A counter affidavit is filed by respondent No.4 stating that, in
view of the involvement of the petitioner in the aforesaid crimes, a
rowdy sheet was opened against him vide Proceedings No.
1558/OW/ACP-SNT/2023, dated 18.11.2023 and subsequently,
3 EVV, J
Wp_38775_2025
the same was transferred to respondent No.6, on the point of
jurisdiction. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on
instructions, would submit that, as of now only one case is
pending against the petitioner and he also seeks to pass
appropriate orders.
5. 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.
4 EVV, J
Wp_38775_2025
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"'
6. 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."
7. Standing Order No.742 of the A.P. Police Manual deals with
classification of rowdies and opening of rowdy sheets, which is
extracted below:
5 EVV, J
Wp_38775_2025
"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."
8. In W.P.No.19194 of 2012 dated 24.08.2015, by referring to
the above said provisions of the A.P. Police Manual and also the
principles laid down in the aforesaid judgments, it was held that
the requirement of involvement in atleast more than two cases for
inferring that he was a habitual offender was not established. The
opening of the rowdy sheet in the name of the petitioner therein
was therefore tainted in law in its very inception. Therefore,
6 EVV, J
Wp_38775_2025
continuation of the said rowdy sheet by the police authorities
ignoring the law laid down by this Court as well as the Supreme
Court cannot be sustained. Accordingly, with the said finding, the
respondents therein were directed to close the rowdy sheet being
maintained in the name of the petitioner therein.
9. Further, this Court in Mansoor Shah Khan v. State of
Telangana (W.P.No.22980 of 2020, dated 01.06.2021) case, held
that a person can be labeled as 'habitual offender' if he is involved
in more than two (2) criminal cases.
10. In the present case, as per the counter-affidavit, only one
case is 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. Thus, the requirement of involvement of
in atleast more than two cases for inferring that the petitioner was
habitual offender was not established. Thus opening of rowdy sheet
in the name of the petitioner is therefore contrary to the procedure
laid down under A.P. Police Manual and procedure laid down in the
Judgments supra.
11. In view of the above and inasmuch as in catena of cases, as
the Courts consistently directed the police to maintain the rowdy
sheet as per the Standing Orders of the A.P. Police Manual, this
7 EVV, J
Wp_38775_2025
Court is of the opinion that the action of the respondent-police in
maintaining the rowdy sheet against the petitioner though only one
case is pending against him amounts to illegality and perversity.
Therefore, the respondent-police are directed to close the rowdy
sheet pending 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 require to be
prevented, the respondent-police are at liberty to take action
against him strictly in accordance with the Standing Orders of the
A.P. Police Manual.
12. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no
order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_____________________
E.V.VENUGOPAL, J
15.04.2026
gkv
