Karnataka High Court
A C Ravi 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.47449/2016 (GM- POLICE)
Between:
A.C. Ravi,
S/o Channegowda,
Aged about 35 years,
Nandini BDA Layout,
Bangalore - 560 052. ... Petitioner
(By Mr. Bipin Hegde, Advocate)
And:
1. State of Karnataka
Represented by the
Principle Secretary to Government
Home Department,
VidhanaSoudha,
Bengalur-560001.
2. The Commissioner of Police
Infantry Road
Bangalore - 560 001.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police
Malleshwaram Sub-Division,
Bangalore 560 020.
Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.47449/2016
A.C. Ravi Vs.
State of Karnataka and others
2/6
4. The Inspector of Police
Rajagopal Nagar Police Station
Bangalore-560003. ... Respondents
(By Ms. Prathima Honnapura, AGA)
*****
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dtd.
23.12.2014 passed by the R-3 directing the Police Inspector
Rajgopalnagar that is the R-4 herein not to open a rowdy
sheet against the petitioner under police manual No. 1059
2[B] [F] vide Annex-A & etc.,
This Writ Petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing in
'B' Group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER
1. The petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:
"a) call for records which resulted in passing Annexure-A;
b) issue a writ in nature of certiorari to quash the order dated: 23-12-2014 passed by the 3rd respondent in order No. ACP-
1/RS/1157/2014 directing the Police Inspector Rajgopalnagar that is the 4th respondent herein not to open a rowdy sheet against the petitioner under Police manual No. Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.47449/2016 A.C. Ravi Vs. State of Karnataka and others 3/6 1059 2(B) (F) which is produced at Annexure-A;
c) Issue a writ in nature of mandamus directing the respondents to remove the name of the petitioner from the rowdy list;
d) Pass such other order/s as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case, to meet the ends of justice."
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 Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.47449/2016 A.C. Ravi Vs. State of Karnataka and others 4/6 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 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 Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.47449/2016 A.C. Ravi Vs. State of Karnataka and others 5/6 points raised by the petitioner separately in such order to be passed by the said Authority.
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 17/08/2017.
Date of Order 01-08-2017 W.P.No.47449/2016 A.C. Ravi Vs. State of Karnataka and others 6/6
8. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of. No costs.
9. Copy of this order be sent to the Respondents forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE BMV*