Bench Sr.No:-16 v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.

SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN DATE : 9th July 2026 JUDGMENT:(per Hon’ble Sri Justice ChallaGunaranjan) Present Intra-Court Appeal is preferred aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 01.12.2025, passed in W.P.No.29404 of 2025, whereby, learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition, with liberty to appellant/writ petitioner to pursue appropriate remedies.

#2. Appellant/writ petitioner approached this Court by way of above writ petition, questioning the action of respondent Nos.2 to HCJ &CGR, J WA No.750 of 2026 2 5, in continuing the Rowdy Sheet No.8 category (c) on the rolls of respondent Nos.4 & 5 police station, in spite of he being acquitted in all pending criminal cases, and further insisting him to appear before the police authorities once in a week on Sundays to be illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

#3. Heard Sri K. Mohan Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home, appearing for the respondents.

#4. Learned counsel the appellant/writ petitionerhad referred to C.C.No.286 of 2014, C.C.No.146 of 2015, C.C.No.211 of 2015, C.C.No.238 of 2015, S.T.C.No.104 of 2016, C.C.No.19 of 2018 and C.C.No.15 of 2021, on the file of the learned Additional Magistrate of First Class, Sullurupet, and S.C.No.115 of 2017, on the file of learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Gudur, which, according him, acquittaland therefore, contended that continuing Rowdy Sheet against him was, in a way, violating his personal liberty enshrined under Article 21 of Constitution of India. HCJ &CGR, J WA No.750 of 2026 3

#5. Respondent No.3 had filed detailed counter providing the particulars of various crimes registered against the petitioner. It is stated that the first crime came to be registered videCrime No.11 of 2014, following by six other crimes under various provisions of IPC. Most of the cases have ended in acquittal either by compromise between the parties or by imposing fine. Even after opening of Rowdy Sheet against appellant in the year 2018, it is stated that he had involved in another crime videCrime No.80 of

#2020. Therefore, in view of the aggressive attitude of appellant, respondents sought to justify continuation of Rowdy Sheet.

#6. Learned Single Judge, after hearing respective counsel, has passed brief and cryptic order disposing of the writ petition. We have gone through the impugned order under challenge. The order does not deal with any of the contentions raised either by appellant/writ petitioner nor respondents as otherwise pleaded in the counter affidavit. On the contrary, learned Single Judge has recorded that there are no criminal cases pending against appellant/writ petitioner, which is now been seriously disputed by learned counsel appearing for the respondents, stating that even as on today there are still pending cases and further that in two of the cases appellant had been convicted. HCJ &CGR, J WA No.750 of 2026 4

#7. We are therefore of the view that inasmuch as the impugned judgment does not deal with the contentions, facts and circumstances as pleaded, we hereby set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 01.12.2025, passed in W.P.No.29404 of 2025, and remand the writ petition to learned Single Judge to decide the matter afresh, upon considering the merits and submissions of both parties. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is disposed of, with no expression of opinion on merits of the matter. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this case, if any, shall stand closed. LISA GILL, CJCHALLA GUNARANJAN, J ANS