Telangana High Court
WP/6534/2007 of Nalam Appa Rao Vs The Superintendent of police, on 28 December 2007
R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ petition No.6534 of 2007 Dated: December 28, 2007 Between: Nalam Appa Rao, S/o. Nooka Raju, Aged about 28 years, R/o. Gopalapuram Village & Mandal, West Godavari District. … Petitioner And Superintendent of Police, West Godavari District, Eluru and others.
HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY
Writ petition No.6534 of 2007
Dated: December 28, 2007
Between:
Nalam Appa Rao, S/o. Nooka Raju,Aged about 28 years, R/o. GopalapuramVillage & Mandal, West Godavari District.
… Petitioner
And
Superintendent of Police, West GodavariDistrict, Eluru and others.
… Respondents
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:
In this writ petition, petitioner seeks declaration by way ofMandamus to declare the action of the respondents in opening andcontinuing rowdy sheet against the petitioner as arbitrary and illegal.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learnedGovernment Pleader for Home appearing for respondents.
3. Petitioner was involved in Cr.No.26/2000 registered for thealleged offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on the fileof the Gopalapuram Police Station. In view of his involvement in thesaid crime, a rowdy sheet was opened against him as per PoliceStanding Order 742.
4. The case of the petitioner is that though he is acquitted of thecharges in the aforesaid crime, the rowdy sheet opened against him isbeing continued and is not being reviewed in the absence of his furtherinvolvement in any crime.
5. Respondent No.3, Sub-Inspector of Police, GopalapuramPolice Station has filed counter affidavit stating that petitioner wasinvolved in Cr.No.26/2000 registered for the alleged offence underSection 302 IPC. It is stated that as per the directions of the Sub-divisional Police Officer, Jangareddygudem, a rowdy sheet wasopened against the petitioner on 31-12-2000 and the same is beingcontinued and renewed from time to time and is valid upto 31-12-2007. It is further stated that a case in Cr.Nos.67 and 68 of 2006 wereregistered against the petitioner under Section 110 (e) Cr.P.C. and hewas arrested and produced before the Mandal Executive Magistrate,Gopalapuram on 21-06-2006. It is also stated that another case inCr.Nos.15 and 16 of 2007 was also registered against the petitionerunder Section 110 (e) Cr.P.C and proceedings are pending.
6. In view of the involvement of the petitioner in the aforesaidcrimes, opening of rowdy sheet against him cannot be said to beillegal. However, this court, in the case of S. Satyanarayana Vs.
State of Andhra Pradesh[[1]], held that the rowdy sheet opened,cannot be continued mechanically and it has to be reviewedperiodically.
7. As much as the rowdy sheet opened against the petitionerstands valid upto 31-12-2007, I dispose of the writ petition permittingthe petitioner to submit a representation to the Sub-Divisional PoliceOfficer concerned bringing to his notice about his acquittal. On such representation being filed, the Sub-Divisional Police Officer shallreview the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner by taking intoaccount the acquittal of the petitioner in Cr.No.26/2000 and also byverifying the involvement of the petitioner in any other crimes, passappropriate orders and communicate the same to the petitioner. Thereshall be no order as to costs.
December 28, 2007MRR
_______________________________JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY.
[1]1999 (6) ALT 249