Writ Petition No. 28291 of 2010 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and rowdy sheet
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 120(B), 147, 148, 302, 323, 452, 506(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 110, 175, 180
Judgment
In this writ petition, petitioner has questioned opening of rowdy sheet bearing No.406 of 2005 on the file of Bhimavaram I Town Police Station, West Godavari District, against him. It is the case of the petitioner that he was falsely implicated in certain crimes and that in spite of his acquittal and in the absence of registration of any further case against him, the respondents are continuing the rowdy sheet without any basis and without proper consideration for renewal as per the Standing Orders of the Andhra Pradesh Police Manual. It is also his case that under the guise of such continuance of rowdy sheet against him, the respondents are calling him to the police station and assaulted him on 17.10.2010.
A detailed counter-affidavit is filed by the first respondent - Station House Officer, Bhimavaram I Town Police Station, West Godavari District, on behalf of the respondents. In the counter-affidavit, while denying various allegations, it is stated that the petitioner is a rowdy element and he involved in the following criminal cases on the file of Bhimavaram I Town Police Station: i) Cr.No.78 of 2002 under Sections 452, 323, 506(2) read with 34 IPC (acquitted). ii) Cr.No.223 of 2004 under Sections 120(B), 147, 148, 302, 506(2) IPC read with 34 IPC. iii) Cr.Nos.175 to 180 under Section 110 Cr.P.C. (bound over) dated 13.09.2005. iv) Cr.Nos.60 to 70 of 2009 under Section 110 Cr.P.C. (bound over), dated 06.03.2009. It is further stated that in view of involvement of the petitioner in the aforesaid cases, rowdy sheet was opened on 30.12.2004 and since then, it is being continued and extended from time to time.
It is categorically pleaded that no cases are pending against the petitioner on the file of Bhimavaram I Town Police Station, while denying the allegation that he was being frequently called to the Police Station and was being assaulted on 17.10.2010 or at any other time. It is to be noted that there are two cases, namely, Crime Nos.78 of 2002 and 223 of 2004, registered against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 452, 323, 506(2) IPC read with 34 IPC and under Sections 120(B), 147, 148, 302, 506(2) IPC read with 149 IPC respectively but he was tried and acquitted by the competent criminal Courts. So far as Crime Nos.175 to 180 and 60 to 70 of 2009 are concerned, they are the proceedings issued under Section 110 Cr.P.C. for binding over the petitioner for the purpose of security and good behaviour. The said crimes were registered as early as on 13.09.2005 and 06.03.2009. In the absence of his conviction in any of the crimes and in the absence of involvement of the petitioner in any further case, there appears no reason or justification to continue the rowdy sheet opened against him.
Operative part
It is also to be noted that as per the Standing Orders of the Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, if a rowdy sheet is opened, it is to be periodically reviewed by taking into account the conduct of such person at the end of every calendar year. In that view of the matter, in the absence of any fresh case registered against the petitioner after 2009, I am of the view that it is a fit case to allow the writ petition by quashing the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and rowdy sheet bearing No.406 of 2005, which is being continued against the petitioner, is hereby quashed. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner involves in any criminal activity or any offence, this order will not preclude the respondents to open a fresh rowdy sheet against him. No order as to costs. _______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 11th FEBRUARY, 2011.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and rowdy sheet
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 120(B), 147, 148, 302, 323, 452, 506(2); Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 110, 175, 180.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.