Karnataka High Court
Sri C Muniraju vs State Of Karnataka on 1 August, 2017
Author: Vineet Kothari
Bench: Vineet Kothari
1/6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI
WRIT PETITION No.9240/2014 (GM- POLICE)
Between:
Sri. C. Muniraju
S/o. Late Sri. Chinnappa,
Aged about 37 years,
R/o. Doddasanne Village,
Kasaba Hobli, Devanahalli Taluk,
Bangalore Rural District - 562 110. ... Petitioner
(By Mr. K. Abhinav Anand, Advocate)
And:
1. State of Karnataka
Represented by
The Principal Secretary to Government,
Home Department,
Vidhanasoudha,
Bangalore-560 001.
2. The Commissioner of Police
Bangalore City
Infantry Road,
Bangalore - 560 001.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police
Bangalore North Division,
Bangalore - 560 001.
Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.9240/2014
Sri. C. Muniraju Vs.
State of Karnataka and others
2/6
4. The Inspector of Police,
International Airport Police Station,
Bangalore City - 560 300.
5. The Inspector of Police,
Devanahalli Police Station,
Devanahalli,
Bangalore City - 562110. ... Respondents
(By Ms. Prathima Honnapura, AGA)
*****
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India, praying quash the rowdy sheet
opened and maintained against the petitioner in the R-4
Police Station [copy of rowdy sheet is not given by the
respondents, hence same is not produced].
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing
this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER
1. The petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:
"a) Issue a writ of certiorari and quash the rowdy sheet opened and maintained against the petitioner in the 4th respondent police station (copy of rowdy sheet is not given by the respondents, hence same is not produced);
and Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.9240/2014 Sri. C. Muniraju Vs. State of Karnataka and others 3/6
b) Pass such other writ/s, direction/s, order/s as deemed fit to pass under the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity ."
2. The grievance raised by the petitioner is that his name has been wrongly entered in the Rowdy Sheet maintained under Order 1059 of the Karnataka Police Manual and the representation made to the higher Authority of the Police Department has not been considered and disposed of by the concerned Authority and the petitioner's rights are prejudicially affected by such entry in the Rowdy Sheet maintained under the aforesaid Order 1059 of the Karnataka Police Manual.
3. After hearing the learned counsels, in the considered opinion of this Court, this Court considers that interference in the impugned entry in the Rowdy Sheet maintained under the aforesaid Order 1059 of the Karnataka Police Manual, at this stage by this Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.9240/2014 Sri. C. Muniraju Vs. State of Karnataka and others 4/6 Court would be premature and since each case essentially involves an enquiry into the facts and application of mind by the concerned Authorities of the Police Department to decide whether the name of the present petitioner deserves to be entered in the Rowdy Sheet or not and whether with the change of circumstances the same deserves to be removed from the said Sheet or not.
4. It is considered appropriate therefore that the present petitioner may make his detailed representation to the higher Authorities of the Police Department namely, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bangalore, and the said Authority shall decide such representation after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner by a detailed speaking order meeting all the points raised by the petitioner separately in such order to be passed by the said Authority.
Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.9240/2014 Sri. C. Muniraju Vs. State of Karnataka and others 5/6
5. A period of two months from the date of first appearance of the petitioner before the said Authority is allowed to the said Respondent to pass a speaking and detailed reasoned order meeting all the points raised by the petitioner separately in accordance with law.
6. It is needless to say that if any adverse order is passed against the petitioner, the petitioner will be free to avail the legal remedy against such order in accordance with law, including by way of Complaint under Section 20-C of the Karnataka Police Act before the State Police Complaints Authority.
7. The petitioner, in the first instance may appear before the said Respondent - Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bangalore, on 21/08/2017.
8. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of. No costs.
Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.9240/2014 Sri. C. Muniraju Vs. State of Karnataka and others 6/6
9. Copy of this order be sent to the Respondents forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE BMV*