Writ Petition No. 18555 of 2007 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
- Bench
- R SUBHASH REDDY
Outcome
Disposed of
Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 324, 354, 458
- Arms Act, 1959 s. 25(1)(b)
- City Police Act s. 70(b)
Judgment
This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in opening a rowdy sheet against the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a permanent resident of Sitarampet, Agapura, Hyderabad. It is stated that the petitioner was falsely implicated in certain crimes and basing on the same, rowdy sheet was opened against him. It is the grievance of the petitioner that in certain crimes registered, he was already acquitted. In spite of the same, the respondents are continuing the rowdy sheet against him. In the counter-affidavit and additional counter- affidavit filed by the second respondent – Inspector of Police, Mangalhat Police Station, Mangalhat, Hyderabad, while denying the allegations of the petitioner, it is stated that the petitioner is a rowdy element and he involved in the following criminal cases. i) Cr.No.86/1994 u/sec.376 r/w 511 IPC (ended in acquittal) ii) Cr.No.19/2002 U/secs.458, 354 and 324 IPC (ended in acquittal) iii) Cr.No.188/2003 U/secs.384, 427 r/w 34 IPC (ended in acquittal) iv) Cr.No.367/98 U/sec.324 IPC r/w 34 IPC (ended in compromise) v) Cr.No.222/2001 u/sec.25(1)(b) of the Arms Act (ended in acquittal) vi) Petty Case No.540/95 U/sec.70(b) of City Police Act (convicted and fined) It is further stated that in view of involvement of the petitioner in the aforesaid cases, to curb and curtail his unlawful activities in the vicinity of Mangalhat Police Station, the respondents have opened the rowdy sheet against him by obtaining permission from the then Assistant Commissioner of Police, Goshamahal Division. It is further stated that the petitioner is a notorious rowdy sheeter. It is also stated that the petitioner involved in certain communal clashes also. In view of involvement of the petitioner in serious crimes, as stated in the counter-affidavit and additional counter-affidavit, I do not find any illegality in opening the rowdy sheet against him. If the petitioner is acquitted in all the cases and is not involved in any further crimes, it is
Operative part
open to him to approach the first respondent/competent authority – Assistant Commissioner of Police, Goshamahal Division, Goshamahal, Hyderabad, by way of representation seeking closure of rowdy sheet opened against him. If any such representation is filed, I am sure that the first respondent will look into the matter, consider the same and take appropriate decision. Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. In view of disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.23808 of 2007 also stands disposed of. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 19th APRIL, 2012.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 324, 354, 458; Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1)(b); City Police Act — s. 70(b).
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.