Telangana High Court
Pothula Sai Nikhil , Chintu vs The State Of Telangana on 7 June, 2023
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.10199 of 2023
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondents in opening the rowdy sheet and continuing the same against the petitioner since 8 years though no criminal case is pending against him and thereby, compelling the petitioner to attend before respondent No.5 - Station House Officer, Hanamkonda Police Station, Hanamkonda, as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and violation of the rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently, to direct the respondents not to ask the petitioner to come to the police station and to close the rowdy sheet opened against him.
The petitioner claims to be a native of Hanamkonda Town and is presently working in a private company in Hyderabad. The respondent No.5 has registered two cases against the petitioner as well as his paternal uncle, who is presently the 5th Division Corporator of Greater Warangal CVBR, J 2 W.P.No.10199 of 2023 Municipal Corporation. It is the case of the petitioner that he was falsely implicated in C.C.No.201 of 2012 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 342 and 324 IPC read with Section 34 IPC on the file of Hanamkonda Police Station and in S.C.No.353 of 2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 364 and 302 IPC read with Sections 149 and 201 IPC on the file of Hanamkonda Police Station. It is his further case that he was acquitted in both the said cases and there are no cases pending against him as on date. The main grievance of the petitioner is that even though there are no criminal cases pending against him for the last eight (8) years, the respondent police with a mala fide intention are continuing the rowdy sheet against him and due to surveillance, he is facing much inconvenience and hardship to lead a respectable and dignified life in the society.
Respondent No.4 - Assistant Commissioner of Police, Warangal Police Commissionerate, Hanamkonda, has filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner is young and energetic and continuously indulging in the commission of CVBR, J 3 W.P.No.10199 of 2023 lawless acts involving breach of public peace and tranquility. He has further stated that there was involvement of the petitioner in Crime No.220 of 2012 on the file of Hanamkonda Police Station, Warangal Commissionerate, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 342 and 324 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and C.C.No.201 of 2012 in respect of the said crime has been ended in acquittal vide order dated 20.04.2015 and the petitioner was also involved in Crime No.11 of 2013 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 120-B, 364, 302 and 201 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and the said case was taken cognizance vide S.C.No.353 of 2014 which was ended in acquittal vide judgment dated 04.12.2015 and Crime Nos.406 of 2015 and 8 of 2018 were also closed and the petitioner was bound over for his good behaviour. He has further stated that as on date, there are no cases pending against the petitioner and that 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 Standing Order No.601 of A.P. Police Manual.
CVBR, J 4 W.P.No.10199 of 2023 He has referred to the Circular bearing C.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. He has also stated that there is no case registered against the petitioner after closure of the criminal cases, C.C.No.201 of 2012 & S.C.No.353 of 2014 and Crime Nos.406 of 2015 & 8 of 2018.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as against the acquittal judgments passed by the competent Courts, the State has not filed any appeal and as on date, 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 others1 and Vijay Narain Singh v. State of Bihar2, in which, the Apex Court held that opening of rowdy sheet and continuing the same without any 1 AIR 1963 SC 1295 2 AIR 1984 SC 1334 CVBR, J 5 W.P.No.10199 of 2023 valid reason would not characterize a person that he is habitually involving in commission of offences.
He has further relied on the judgments in Sunkara Satyanarayana v. State of Andhra Pradesh3; B. Satyanarayana Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh4; Majid Babu v. Government of Andhra Pradesh5; Kamma Bapuji v. Station House Officer, Brahmasamudram6. He has further relied on the judgment in Puttagunta Pasi v. Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada7, 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.
He has also relied on the judgment in Yerramsetti Venugopal Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others8, in which, the learned Single Judge of High Court of Andhra 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 6 W.P.No.10199 of 2023 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 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.
It is apt to refer to the relevant Standing Orders of A.P. Police Manual.
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.
CVBR, J 7 W.P.No.10199 of 2023 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.
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"' Further, 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 CVBR, J 8 W.P.No.10199 of 2023 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." 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;
(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) CVBR, J 9 W.P.No.10199 of 2023 (2) Instructions in Order 735 regarding discontinuance of History Sheets shall also apply to Rowdy Sheets."
In the present case, as per the counter-affidavit, 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 subsequent to the acquittal judgments passed by the competent Courts.
In view of the above and inasmuch as in the 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 is of the opinion that the action of the respondent police in maintaining the rowdy sheet against the petitioner even though no case is pending against him cannot be said to be proper.
CVBR, J 10 W.P.No.10199 of 2023 Therefore, the respondent police are directed to close the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner vide C.No.161/G/SDPO-HMK/2013 dated 25.03.2013. 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 respondent police are at liberty to take action against him strictly in accordance with the Standing Orders of A.P. Police Manual.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
_______________________ C.V. BHASKAR REDDY, J 7th JUNE, 2023.
kvni