Telangana High Court
WP/28130/2007 of Sayyad Basha Vs The Superintendent of Police, East Godavari District on 28 December 2007
SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 28130 of 2007 Dated 28th December, 2007 Between Sayyed Basha …Petitioner and The Superintendent of Police, East Godavari District, at Kakinada, and, ors …Respondents. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 28130 of
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 28130 of 2007
BetweenSayyed Basha
Dated 28[th] December, 2007
…Petitioner
and
The Superintendent of Police,East Godavari District, at Kakinada, and, ors …Respondents.
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDYWRIT PETITION NO : 28130 of 2007
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking Writ of Mandamus to declarethe action of the third respondent in opening and continuing rowdysheet No.356 of 1999 against the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary.
It is stated that in the year 1999, in view of the involvement of thepetitioner in Crime No. 39/1999 on the file of the Draksharamam PoliceStation, EG District, for the offences under Sections 147, 148 and 307r/w. 149 IPC, a rowdy sheet was opened against the petitioner. Withreference to the same, the petitioner was charge sheeted and tried inS.C.No. 22 of 2000 and the learned Assistant Sessions Judge,Ramachandrapuram, convicted him by judgment dated 18-10-2002.Against the said judgment, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No. 258of 2002 and the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Court Court, Rajahmundry allowed the said Criminal Appeal byjudgment dated 15-3-2005 and acquitted the petitioner. It is thegrievance of the petitioner that though rowdy sheet was opened onlyon the allegation of involvement in only one case and in absence ofany further cases registered against him, the rowdy sheet is beingcontinued from year to year, mechanically.
Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learnedGovernment Pleader appearing for the respondents.
In the case of S.Satyanarayana Vs. State of AndhraPradesh {1999 {6) ALT 249}, this Court held that the rowdy sheetopened cannot be continued mechanically and it has to be reviewed periodically. Though it is submitted by the learned Counsel for thepetitioner that in spite of the acquittal of the petitioner in the above saidcase, the rowdy sheet is being continued against the petitioner, but,however, whether the petitioner is involved in any other cases or notso as to continue the rowdy sheet against the petitioner, is a matterwhich is required to be considered by the competent authority. In thatview of the matter, as it is stated that the above case, in which thepetitioner was involved, ended in acquittal and there is no furtherinvolvement of the petitioner in any other crimes and the rowdy sheetopened against him is valid up to 31-12-2007, I dispose of the WritPetition, permitting the petitioner to make a representation in thisregard before the first and second respondents within a period of twoweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, giving details ofacquittals . If such a representation is filed, the respondents aredirected to review the necessity of continuance or otherwise of therowdy sheet opened against the petitioner, by taking into account theacquittals of the petitioner in various criminal proceedings and non- involvement of the petitioner in other criminal cases, and, passappropriate orders and communicate the same to the petitioner.
Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.No order as to costs.
DATE: 28-12-2007CC in two days(BO) Msnr.
----------------------------------
JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY