Telangana High Court
WP/2812/2005 of R. Kannaya Singh alias Kannayya Lal Vs The Commissioner of Police, on 26 December 2007
SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2812 of 2005 Dated 26th December, 2007 Between R.Kannaya Singh @ Kannayya Lal …Petitioner and The Commissioner of Police, Cyberbad, RR District …Respondents. THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 2812 of 2005 ORDER:
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 2812 of 2005
Between
Dated 26[th] December, 2007
R.Kannaya Singh @ Kannayya Lal
…Petitioner
and
The Commissioner of Police, Cyberbad, RR District …Respondents.
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 2812 of 2005
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 respondents in opening rowdy sheet against thepetitioner in Narsingi Police Station, Ranga Reddy District as illegaland arbitrary.
At that first instance, a rowdy sheet, as contemplated under theA.P. Police Standing Orders, was opened against the petitioner in theyear 1999 on the ground that the petitioner was involved in thefollowing criminal cases:
(1) Cr.No. 53/88 for the offence under Sections 147, 324, 302r/w.149 CPCr/w.149 CPC
(2) Cr.No.79/93 for the offence under Section 34(a) of the A.P.Excise Act.Excise Act.
(3) Cr.No.75/96 for the offence under Sections 447 & 427 IPC
(4) Cr.No.78/91 for the offence under Sections 447 & 506 IPC
(5) Cr.No.79/97 under Sections 447, 506, & 379 IPC
(6) Cr.No.85/98 for the offence under Sections 447 & 506 IPC
(7) Cr.No.86/98 for the offence under Sections 447, 506 & 379IPCIPC
(8) Cr.No.60/2000 for the offence under Sections 420, 120(a)IPC.IPC.
It is the grievance of the petitioner that though in all most all thecases, he was acquitted and there is no further involvement in anycase, the rowdy sheet is being continued mechanically withoutreviewing the sane.
Though Writ Petition is of the year 2005, no counter affidavit isfiled on behalf of the respondents. But, however, on instructions, it issubmitted by the learned Government Pleader appearing for therespondents that no cases are pending against the petitioner as ontoday. It is further stated that the rowdy sheet opened against thepetitioner is being reviewed from time to time and is valid up to 31-12-2007.
Earlier, opening of rowdy sheet was governed by StandingOrder 742 of the Police Standing Orders. But, however, in the place ofold Standing Orders, new Police Standing Orders are brought intoforce and presently, opening of rowdy sheet and its continuance, isgoverned by Standing Order 601 of AP Police Manual.
In the case of S.Satyanarayana Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh{1999 {6) ALT 249}, this Court held that the rowdy sheet openedcannot be continued mechanically and it has to be reviewed periodically. In that view of the matter, as it is stated that all the cases,in which the petitioner was involved, ended in acquittal after trial andthere is no further involvement of the petitioner in any other crimes, Idispose of the Writ Petition directing the respondents to review thenecessity of continuance or otherwise of the rowdy sheet openedagainst the petitioner, by taking into account the acquittals of thepetitioner in various criminal proceedings and non-involvement of thepetitioner in other criminal case s, and, pass appropriate orders andcommunicate the same to the petitioner.
Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.No order as to costs.
----------------------------------JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY
DATE: 26-12-2007.Msnr.