Karnataka High Court
Mohd Zaid S/O Mehboob Maniyar vs The State Of Karnataka on 5 August, 2025
Author: Suraj Govindaraj
Bench: Suraj Govindaraj
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:9735
WP No. 105492 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT PETITION NO.105492 OF 2023 (GM-POLICE)
BETWEEN:
MOHD ZAID S/O. MEHBOOB MANIYAR,
AGE: 27 YRS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: PLOT NO. 9/1 2ND CROSS,
AZAM NAGAR, BELAGAVI - 590 010.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. A. D. NADAF, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY IT'S SECRETARY HOME DEPT,
VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560 001.
2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
APMC PS, BELAGAVI,
BELAGAVI - 590 001.
3. STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
MALMARUTI PS, BELAGAVI,
BELAGAVI - 590 001.
4. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (L & O)
SAROJA
BEHIND LINGRAJ COLLEGE, COLLEGE ROAD,
HANGARAKI
Digitally signed by SAROJA
BELAGAVI - 590 001.
...RESPONDENTS
HANGARAKI
Location: High Court of
Karnataka, Dharwad Bench
Date: 2025.08.07 11:58:28
+0530
(BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R1 TO R4)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE AN
APPROPRIATE WRIT AND DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS:
REMOVE/DELETE NAME OF THE PETITIONER FROM THE ROWDY
SHEETER AND MODUS OPERANDI BUREAU INSERTED BY THE
RESPONDENTS. TO COMPENSATE AND AMOUNT OF INR- 2,00,000/-
FOR THE HARDSHIP CAUSED TO THE PETITIONER SINCE HIS NAME
IS INSERTED IN THE HISTORY SHEETER. AMONGST THE OTHER
GROUNDS AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND GROUNDS RELIED IN THE
AVERMENT MAY BE CONSIDERED AS THE PART OF THIS PETITION
AND ETC.,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:9735
WP No. 105492 of 2023
HC-KAR
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
ORAL ORDER
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)
1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:
Issue an appropriate writ and direct the respondents:
A. To remove/delete name of the petitioner from the rowdy sheeter and modus operandi bureau inserted by the respondents.
B. to compensate and amount of inr- 2,00,000/- for the hardship caused to the petitioner since his name is inserted in the history sheeter.
amongst the other grounds at the time of hearing and grounds relied in the averment may be considered as the part of this petition.
Grant such other relief as this Hon'ble court deems fit and necessary, in the interest of justice.
2. The grievance of the petitioner is threefold. Firstly, Sri.A.D.Nadaf, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the guidelines which have been laid down by this Court in its order dated 27.07.2022 in WP No.16604/2015 have not been followed. Secondly, he submits that before the insertion of the -3- NC: 2025:KHC-D:9735 WP No. 105492 of 2023 HC-KAR name of the petitioner in the rowdy-sheet, the petitioner was not given any opportunity to respond to the proposal to the inclusion of the name of the petitioner in the rowdy-sheet. Thirdly, even after the inclusion of the name of the petitioner, when the petitioner made an application for review by placing documents on record indicating his acquittal in two of the proceedings as regards which allegations were made against the petitioner, those were not considered and the name of the petitioner continued to be reflected in the rowdy-sheet maintained by respondent No.4.
3. Sri.Sharad V Magadum, learned AGA would submit that there were three cases which had been filed against the petitioner in Crime No.278/2016 for offences under Sections 143, 147, 307 and 149 of the IPC, Crime No.100/2017 under Section 392 of the IPC and Crime No.103/2017 under Sections 341 and 392 of the IPC.
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:9735 WP No. 105492 of 2023 HC-KAR
4. On instructions, he submits that insofar as Crime No.278/2016 and 103/2017, the petitioner has been acquitted. The proceedings in Crime No.100/2017 are still going on.
5. On the basis of the pendency of the said proceedings in Crime No.100/2017, he submits that the offences being alleged against the petitioner being one under 392 of IPC is covered under Clause-G of Order 1059 of the Karnataka Police Manual and as such the inclusion of the name of the petitioner is proper and correct.
6. Heard Sri.A.D.Nadaf, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Sharad V Magadum, learned AGA for the respondents. Perused the writ petition papers.
7. The facts in the present matter are not in dispute.
Though there were 3 cases which had been initiated against the petitioner, in two of those cases as referred supra, the petitioner has been acquitted and only one proceeding continues to be pending. Merely -5- NC: 2025:KHC-D:9735 WP No. 105492 of 2023 HC-KAR because there are three complaints which have been filed, would not entitle the respondents to include the name of the petitioner in the rowdy-sheet, even after the acquittal in two of those matters.
8. Thus, without going into the aspect of whether the inclusion of the name of the petitioner initially was proper or not, at the time when review application had been filed by the petitioner by placing on record his acquittal in two of the proceedings, it was required for respondent No.4 to take the same into consideration and delete the name of the petitioner from the rowdy-sheet. Acquittal of the petitioner in two out of three of the matters is an important aspect, which was required to be taken into consideration by respondent No.4, which has not been so done, more so, when no appeal has been filed by the State against the said acquittal.
9. In that view of the matter, I pass the following: -6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:9735 WP No. 105492 of 2023 HC-KAR ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. Respondent No. 4 is directed to delete the name of the petitioner from the rowdy-sheet maintained by respondent No.4 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Sd/-
(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE SH/CT-ASC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2