The High Court · 2025

Petition undqr Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the opening and maintaining of rowdy- sheet against petitioner- as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1) ( e) and 21 of lhe constitution of lndia and consequen y direct the Respondent No. 5 to close the Rowdy sheet against the petitioner including the online data in the interest of justice : a IA NO: 10F 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou t may be pleased to direct the respondent no. 5 not to insist for petitioner s [) 3sence in the police station Rein Bazar, Hyderabad in connection with the rov dy sheet maintained against him Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SYED MOUNIS JAFER ABI )t Counsel forthe Respondents: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.24O35 of 2o25 ORDER: Heard Sri Syed Mounis Jafer Abidi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5. With their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the following prayer: - "Declaring the opening and maintaining of rotudg-sheet against the petitioner as illegal, orbitrary and in uiolation of Articles 14, 19 (1) (e) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.S to close the roudg- sh.eet against tLe petitioner including the online.'

3. l,earned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner was falsely implicated in five (05) cases in the year 2022 on the report of Police Reni Bazar, Commissioner of Police and ADM (Executive) bounded under Section 107 of Cr.P.C, M.C.No.3 of 2022 on the allegation of causing breach of peace, tranquility of general public and the said five cases are as follows: t ) Sections 506 IPC Charge Sheet No. 37s /2014 44a, 506, 427 , 29o & 109 IPC 452, 427 IPC NIL- st. No. 1. 2 3 CriEe No. r39 / 2013, P.s Rein Bazar Dated 23.O7.2O13 149/2013, P.S Rein Bazar Dated 12.08.20l3 /20ls, P.S 27 Rein Bazar, Dated 04.02.20 l S 4 5 / 2018, P.S. 101 Rein Bazar, Dated 08.05.2018 Cr 54 of 2024 P.S. Rein Bazar 341, 323,506 r /w. 34 IPC 188, 290, 34t IPC 1868 /2ors ResuIt A: J.l 0.r uitted vide Igment )7.20t9. uitted vide Jrr( gment d?t d 24 . 2.2O t4 Ccr bl' I Adr 07.) Cotl bv,-, 10.(). Con v 29.()9 volu r conf,:l sentet paynlr Rs.80{ pounded rk Adalath Lok 1th Case i5/20|s I t.2015 rounded k Adalath Arvard 2020 :ted vide 2024 on sion and ced for 4 Learned counsel for the pedtioner submits 1l at except for C.C.No.6O00 of 2024 for oll )nces under and 34 1 of IpC cha_rged fo - violation of cl his brother the conrriction in Sections lgg, 2gg prohibition order due to a birthday celebration without any complaint from any person, he convicted in any of the aforementioned cases. submits that the F.I.R uide Crime No.139 of 2Oi3 2013 were lodged at the instance of one Farooq Ha moneyedjmd influential, even though there was no of the petitioner. Further Crime No.27 of 201 5 and 149 of s 1mi who is I lvolvement md Crime ha s not been Tl e petitioner ---w!F'- .--..4_ .--.*-._- Ll 3 7 No.lol of 2018 were settled and compounded before the Lok Adalath and there is no other case is pending. However, respondent No.5 under the garb of the false cases registered against the petitioner in the year 2013 has opened rowdy sheet on 15.08.2013 ald has been maintaining it since then, even though there was no involvement of the petitioner since 2015 to

2022. In the year 2022, on report of the Police, Rein Bazar, Commissioner of Police and ADM (Executive) bounded the petitioner under Section i07 of Cr.P.C, as M.C.No.3 of 2022 on the allegation of breach of peace and tranquility of general public. Petitioner further submits that he was not given an opportunity to defend himself artd no enquiry was conducted and no material was placed to substantiate the allegation. Petitioner submits that he was bound over at the instance of the respondents in a civil dispute between the petitioner and his brother in a Civil Suit in O.S.No.5028 of 2022 which is still pending and the bound over period was completed on

23.05.2024 and the sarne was extended suomoto without there being any complaint before the Executive Magistrate, Hyderabad arrd again was bounded-over under M.C.No.828 of 2024 for one year and the same will complete on 19.07.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that 5 police on theil 'own accord are extending the bound over on the I pretext of maintaining rowdy sheet even tho u gh there is no involvement of the petitioner in any cases for _he last several years and also submits that respondent No.S i; curtailing his liberty which is affecting his livelihood. Learnerl counsel for the petitioner further submits that respondents can c nly open rowdy sheet under Section 110 (e) of Cr.p.C and under italding Order No. 601 of A.p/T.S police Marrua_l. It is further submitted that petitioner has requested respondent No.5 for copy of rowdy sheet and requested to enquire into the facts ascertaine C, however, no action has been taken on the application ald pet tioner is being made to sit outside the poiice station for hours. ! uestioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. 6. Respondent No.4 in his counter stated the t petitioner is involved in the following criminal cases:

1. Crime No. 139 of 2O 13 for tl_re offences .nder Section 506 of IpC of Rein Bazar police St tion, Hyderabad. The petitroner herein has been acquitted on O4.OZ.2Ot9 uide C.C.No.37S/2otq 2. Crime No. 149 of 2013 for the offences I nder Sections 44g, 506, 422,2gO r/w Seclion lO9 r,1 IpC. Rein Bazar Police Station. The petitioner hererr has been acquitted on 24.12.2014 uid.e C.C.No.743 /2O73. -:'=-'--: --lx---"lE?.ffit-r-!-, ! I r 5

3. The petitioner herein has been bound over in Crime No.4l l2O).4 under Section 4l (a) I lO7 Cr.P.C., of Rein Bazar Po[ce Station, Hyderabad.

4. Crime No.27/2015 for the offences under Sections 452, 427 rlw. 34 of IPC of Rein Bazar . Police Station. The case was ended in compromise before the Lok Adalath uide No.465 /2O 15 dated

07.o4.2015.

5. Crime No.101 l2Ol8 for the offences under Sections 347,323,506 r/w 34 of IPC of Rein Bazar Police Station, Hyderabad. The case was compounded uide C.C.No- 1868 of 2O 19 dated to.o4.2020.

6. Crime No.54/ 2024 for the offences under Sections la9,29O r/w.34 of IPC; Section 21/76 C.P. Act of Rein Bazat Police Station, Hyderabad. The petitioner herein was onvicted on 29.09.2024 in C.C.No.6O00/2024. It is further submitted that petitioner was acquitted in two 7 . cases, convicted in one case and two cases have been compromised before the Lok Adalath and one case has been compounddd and in view of the involvement of the petitioner in the above criminal cases, it has become incumbent on the part of police to open a rowdy sheet against the petitioner herein to keep watch on.the activities to curtail unlawful activities and as per the proceedings of Assistant Commissioner of Police, 6 Mirchowk Division, Hyderabad rowdy sheet ha s been opened against the petitioner uide No.1202IOW/ACF,/ MC_DVN/2013 dated 18.08.2013 on the file of the responderr No.S and the same is being maintained and continued up to I I.12.2025 arld also submitted that other than above there are r( cases pending against the petitioner as on date. It is further sut mitted that the petitioner is an active rowdy sheeter and creati: Lg nuisarce to the general public, but in fear of him, nobody <:i me forward to lodge complaint against him, as such, rowdy srl .eet has to be maintained to watch his activities a,d submits trr rt there are no grounds to close the rowdy sheet against the pet. tioner and the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liabre to be < ismissed.

8. It is categorica-l submission of the learned r ounser for the petitioner that except the aforementioned one casi( no other case is registered nor pending against the p.etitioner, vhich has not been disputed by the learned Assistant Governrrrr nt pleader for Home. At this juncture, it is not out of place to .efer the order rendered by this court in the case of Mansoor sI ah Khan and others Vs. State of Telangana rep. by its princ:i1 ral Secretary, Home Department, Hyderabad and othersr whe -ein it is held that rowdy,sheet could not be opened against an i rdividual in a casual and mechanical manner and due care and c lution should ' zoz r 1+1elt:o 1rs; ,t 7 be taken by the Police before characterizing a person as a rowdy and figuring as zrn accused in two cases would not be sufficient to characterize a person as a habitual offender. For better appreciation, the relevalt paras No.23, 24 and 26 are extracted hereunder. "23. As stated above, as per Standing Order 601 of the A.P. Police Manua[ for opening and maintenance of rowdg sheet, a person against whom the same was issued should habiluallg commit, atternpt to comnlit or abel the commission of offences inuoLuing a breach of peace, disturbance to public order and secttrity. Furlher, as heLd by the Hon'ble Apex Court tn Vijag Narain Singh's cose (2 supra), the expression 'habitually' utould mean 'repeatedlg' or 'persstentlA' implging a thread of continuitg, stinging together similar repetitive acts, and a single act or omission would not characlerize an act as 'habitual'. Tlrc Hon'ble Apex Court uas of the opinion that to quatlfA as a 'habit', a persot must haue grou.)n accustomed to leading a hfe of crtme, uthereby it tuould be a force of habit, inherent or latent, in an indiuidial uith a crimtnal instinct, tuith a ciminal disposition of mind, that makes him dangerous to societV in general-

24. In uieu of the aboue said law laid down and in vtew of the aboue satd discussion, tte petitioners herein uere inuolued in the qboue said tuto cimes. One crime hns ended tn acqtittal. As on todag, onLg one cctse i.e PRC.No.307 of 2O20 is pending against the petitioners herein. Thu' the requirement of inuoluement of in at least more than two cases for inferring that the petitioners uere habitual olfenders taas not established. Thus opening of rowdg sheets tn tlle name of the petitioners is therefore contrary to I 8 the procedure laid down under A.p. police, It anual and procedure laid down in the Jud.gments sL, tr -e.

26. There-Jore, the uit petttion is alloued t.r i the respondents are directed. to close the rot d!) ! heets being maintained in the names of the petitiot \ .s on the file of Banjara Hils police Station, Hgd<r.bad. I.here shall be no order as lo cosrs. ,

9. From the above, it could be culled out tha for inferring a person as a habitual offender, his involvement i r at least more than two cases is required. Further, as per Statr [ng Order 6O1 of the A.P. Police Manual, for opening artd maint,_. larce of rowdy sheet, a person against whom the satne was issued should habitually commit, attempt to commit or abet tht: :ommission of offences involving a breach of peace, disturbarrce o public order and security. In the instalt case, it is an admitto I fact that the petitioner is involved in F.I.R.Nos. 139 of 2013, lq) of 2013,27 of 20 15, lO1 of 2018 and 54 of 2024 on the fiie of the police Station, Rein Bazar but he has been acquitted n two cases, convicted in one case, two cases have been comp.., ,mised before the Lok Adalath and one case has been compolr 1ded. Thus, opening of rowdy-sheet and continuing the samr against the petitioner is contrary to the procedure laid dou I under A. p. Police Marrual and against the law laid down by this Court in the case of Mansoor Shah Khan (cited supra) and , rerefore, the rowdy-sheet opened against the petitioner is riable tr be crosed. I I r 9

10. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to close the rowdy-sheet opened against the petitioner. However, it is made clea-r that this order does not preclude the respondent Police authority to initiate appropriate action on the petitioner, if he indulges in any activity which is against the public tranquility. However, respondent No.S shall continue supervision on the petitioner till 31. 12.2025. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed To, SD/- AHMED ABDULLA KHAN STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad Commissionerate, Command and Control Centre, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, South- east zone, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Mirchowk division, Hyderabad- 5. The Station House Officer, P. S. Rein Bazar, Hyderabad 6. One CC to SRI SYED MOUNIS JAFER ABlDl, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies PVL My HIGH COURT DATED:0911012025 ORDER WP.No.24035 of 2025 I ,.',...\ 11 L:i w :'i "] ,/ \. // -' ,-2 ..!t'..,,-., . .... ' '.-) \. --....:- -.,- DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS rC

Petition undqr Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the opening and maintaining of rowdy- sheet against petitioner- as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1) ( e) and 21 of lhe constitution of lndia and consequen y direct the Respondent No. 5 to close the Rowdy sheet against the petitioner including the online data in the interest of justice : a IA NO: 10F 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou t may be pleased to direct the respondent no. 5 not to insist for petitioner s [) 3sence in the police station Rein Bazar, Hyderabad in connection with the rov dy sheet maintained against him Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SYED MOUNIS JAFER ABI )t Counsel forthe Respondents: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.24O35 of 2o25 ORDER: Heard Sri Syed Mounis Jafer Abidi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5. With their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the following prayer: - "Declaring the opening and maintaining of rotudg-sheet against the petitioner as illegal, orbitrary and in uiolation of Articles 14, 19 (1) (e) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.S to close the roudg- sh.eet against tLe petitioner including the online.'

3. l,earned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner was falsely implicated in five (05) cases in the year 2022 on the report of Police Reni Bazar, Commissioner of Police and ADM (Executive) bounded under Section 107 of Cr.P.C, M.C.No.3 of 2022 on the allegation of causing breach of peace, tranquility of general public and the said five cases are as follows: t ) Sections 506 IPC Charge Sheet No. 37s /2014 44a, 506, 427 , 29o & 109 IPC 452, 427 IPC NIL- st. No. 1. 2 3 CriEe No. r39 / 2013, P.s Rein Bazar Dated 23.O7.2O13 149/2013, P.S Rein Bazar Dated 12.08.20l3 /20ls, P.S 27 Rein Bazar, Dated 04.02.20 l S 4 5 / 2018, P.S. 101 Rein Bazar, Dated 08.05.2018 Cr 54 of 2024 P.S. Rein Bazar 341, 323,506 r /w. 34 IPC 188, 290, 34t IPC 1868 /2ors ResuIt A: J.l 0.r uitted vide Igment )7.20t9. uitted vide Jrr( gment d?t d 24 . 2.2O t4 Ccr bl' I Adr 07.) Cotl bv,-, 10.(). Con v 29.()9 volu r conf,:l sentet paynlr Rs.80{ pounded rk Adalath Lok 1th Case i5/20|s I t.2015 rounded k Adalath Arvard 2020 :ted vide 2024 on sion and ced for 4 Learned counsel for the pedtioner submits 1l at except for C.C.No.6O00 of 2024 for oll )nces under and 34 1 of IpC cha_rged fo - violation of cl his brother the conrriction in Sections lgg, 2gg prohibition order due to a birthday celebration without any complaint from any person, he convicted in any of the aforementioned cases. submits that the F.I.R uide Crime No.139 of 2Oi3 2013 were lodged at the instance of one Farooq Ha moneyedjmd influential, even though there was no of the petitioner. Further Crime No.27 of 201 5 and 149 of s 1mi who is I lvolvement md Crime ha s not been Tl e petitioner ---w!F'- .--..4_ .--.*-._- Ll 3 7 No.lol of 2018 were settled and compounded before the Lok Adalath and there is no other case is pending. However, respondent No.5 under the garb of the false cases registered against the petitioner in the year 2013 has opened rowdy sheet on 15.08.2013 ald has been maintaining it since then, even though there was no involvement of the petitioner since 2015 to

2022. In the year 2022, on report of the Police, Rein Bazar, Commissioner of Police and ADM (Executive) bounded the petitioner under Section i07 of Cr.P.C, as M.C.No.3 of 2022 on the allegation of breach of peace and tranquility of general public. Petitioner further submits that he was not given an opportunity to defend himself artd no enquiry was conducted and no material was placed to substantiate the allegation. Petitioner submits that he was bound over at the instance of the respondents in a civil dispute between the petitioner and his brother in a Civil Suit in O.S.No.5028 of 2022 which is still pending and the bound over period was completed on

23.05.2024 and the sarne was extended suomoto without there being any complaint before the Executive Magistrate, Hyderabad arrd again was bounded-over under M.C.No.828 of 2024 for one year and the same will complete on 19.07.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that 5 police on theil 'own accord are extending the bound over on the I pretext of maintaining rowdy sheet even tho u gh there is no involvement of the petitioner in any cases for _he last several years and also submits that respondent No.S i; curtailing his liberty which is affecting his livelihood. Learnerl counsel for the petitioner further submits that respondents can c nly open rowdy sheet under Section 110 (e) of Cr.p.C and under italding Order No. 601 of A.p/T.S police Marrua_l. It is further submitted that petitioner has requested respondent No.5 for copy of rowdy sheet and requested to enquire into the facts ascertaine C, however, no action has been taken on the application ald pet tioner is being made to sit outside the poiice station for hours. ! uestioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. 6. Respondent No.4 in his counter stated the t petitioner is involved in the following criminal cases:

1. Crime No. 139 of 2O 13 for tl_re offences .nder Section 506 of IpC of Rein Bazar police St tion, Hyderabad. The petitroner herein has been acquitted on O4.OZ.2Ot9 uide C.C.No.37S/2otq 2. Crime No. 149 of 2013 for the offences I nder Sections 44g, 506, 422,2gO r/w Seclion lO9 r,1 IpC. Rein Bazar Police Station. The petitioner hererr has been acquitted on 24.12.2014 uid.e C.C.No.743 /2O73. -:'=-'--: --lx---"lE?.ffit-r-!-, ! I r 5

3. The petitioner herein has been bound over in Crime No.4l l2O).4 under Section 4l (a) I lO7 Cr.P.C., of Rein Bazar Po[ce Station, Hyderabad.

4. Crime No.27/2015 for the offences under Sections 452, 427 rlw. 34 of IPC of Rein Bazar . Police Station. The case was ended in compromise before the Lok Adalath uide No.465 /2O 15 dated

07.o4.2015.

5. Crime No.101 l2Ol8 for the offences under Sections 347,323,506 r/w 34 of IPC of Rein Bazar Police Station, Hyderabad. The case was compounded uide C.C.No- 1868 of 2O 19 dated to.o4.2020.

6. Crime No.54/ 2024 for the offences under Sections la9,29O r/w.34 of IPC; Section 21/76 C.P. Act of Rein Bazat Police Station, Hyderabad. The petitioner herein was onvicted on 29.09.2024 in C.C.No.6O00/2024. It is further submitted that petitioner was acquitted in two 7 . cases, convicted in one case and two cases have been compromised before the Lok Adalath and one case has been compounddd and in view of the involvement of the petitioner in the above criminal cases, it has become incumbent on the part of police to open a rowdy sheet against the petitioner herein to keep watch on.the activities to curtail unlawful activities and as per the proceedings of Assistant Commissioner of Police, 6 Mirchowk Division, Hyderabad rowdy sheet ha s been opened against the petitioner uide No.1202IOW/ACF,/ MC_DVN/2013 dated 18.08.2013 on the file of the responderr No.S and the same is being maintained and continued up to I I.12.2025 arld also submitted that other than above there are r( cases pending against the petitioner as on date. It is further sut mitted that the petitioner is an active rowdy sheeter and creati: Lg nuisarce to the general public, but in fear of him, nobody <:i me forward to lodge complaint against him, as such, rowdy srl .eet has to be maintained to watch his activities a,d submits trr rt there are no grounds to close the rowdy sheet against the pet. tioner and the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liabre to be < ismissed.

8. It is categorica-l submission of the learned r ounser for the petitioner that except the aforementioned one casi( no other case is registered nor pending against the p.etitioner, vhich has not been disputed by the learned Assistant Governrrrr nt pleader for Home. At this juncture, it is not out of place to .efer the order rendered by this court in the case of Mansoor sI ah Khan and others Vs. State of Telangana rep. by its princ:i1 ral Secretary, Home Department, Hyderabad and othersr whe -ein it is held that rowdy,sheet could not be opened against an i rdividual in a casual and mechanical manner and due care and c lution should ' zoz r 1+1elt:o 1rs; ,t 7 be taken by the Police before characterizing a person as a rowdy and figuring as zrn accused in two cases would not be sufficient to characterize a person as a habitual offender. For better appreciation, the relevalt paras No.23, 24 and 26 are extracted hereunder. "23. As stated above, as per Standing Order 601 of the A.P. Police Manua[ for opening and maintenance of rowdg sheet, a person against whom the same was issued should habiluallg commit, atternpt to comnlit or abel the commission of offences inuoLuing a breach of peace, disturbance to public order and secttrity. Furlher, as heLd by the Hon'ble Apex Court tn Vijag Narain Singh's cose (2 supra), the expression 'habitually' utould mean 'repeatedlg' or 'persstentlA' implging a thread of continuitg, stinging together similar repetitive acts, and a single act or omission would not characlerize an act as 'habitual'. Tlrc Hon'ble Apex Court uas of the opinion that to quatlfA as a 'habit', a persot must haue grou.)n accustomed to leading a hfe of crtme, uthereby it tuould be a force of habit, inherent or latent, in an indiuidial uith a crimtnal instinct, tuith a ciminal disposition of mind, that makes him dangerous to societV in general-

24. In uieu of the aboue said law laid down and in vtew of the aboue satd discussion, tte petitioners herein uere inuolued in the qboue said tuto cimes. One crime hns ended tn acqtittal. As on todag, onLg one cctse i.e PRC.No.307 of 2O20 is pending against the petitioners herein. Thu' the requirement of inuoluement of in at least more than two cases for inferring that the petitioners uere habitual olfenders taas not established. Thus opening of rowdg sheets tn tlle name of the petitioners is therefore contrary to I 8 the procedure laid down under A.p. police, It anual and procedure laid down in the Jud.gments sL, tr -e.

26. There-Jore, the uit petttion is alloued t.r i the respondents are directed. to close the rot d!) ! heets being maintained in the names of the petitiot \ .s on the file of Banjara Hils police Station, Hgd<r.bad. I.here shall be no order as lo cosrs. ,

9. From the above, it could be culled out tha for inferring a person as a habitual offender, his involvement i r at least more than two cases is required. Further, as per Statr [ng Order 6O1 of the A.P. Police Manual, for opening artd maint,_. larce of rowdy sheet, a person against whom the satne was issued should habitually commit, attempt to commit or abet tht: :ommission of offences involving a breach of peace, disturbarrce o public order and security. In the instalt case, it is an admitto I fact that the petitioner is involved in F.I.R.Nos. 139 of 2013, lq) of 2013,27 of 20 15, lO1 of 2018 and 54 of 2024 on the fiie of the police Station, Rein Bazar but he has been acquitted n two cases, convicted in one case, two cases have been comp.., ,mised before the Lok Adalath and one case has been compolr 1ded. Thus, opening of rowdy-sheet and continuing the samr against the petitioner is contrary to the procedure laid dou I under A. p. Police Marrual and against the law laid down by this Court in the case of Mansoor Shah Khan (cited supra) and , rerefore, the rowdy-sheet opened against the petitioner is riable tr be crosed. I I r 9

10. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to close the rowdy-sheet opened against the petitioner. However, it is made clea-r that this order does not preclude the respondent Police authority to initiate appropriate action on the petitioner, if he indulges in any activity which is against the public tranquility. However, respondent No.S shall continue supervision on the petitioner till 31. 12.2025. No order as to costs. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed To, SD/- AHMED ABDULLA KHAN STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad Commissionerate, Command and Control Centre, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, South- east zone, Hyderabad. 4. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Mirchowk division, Hyderabad- 5. The Station House Officer, P. S. Rein Bazar, Hyderabad 6. One CC to SRI SYED MOUNIS JAFER ABlDl, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies PVL My HIGH COURT DATED:0911012025 ORDER WP.No.24035 of 2025 I ,.',...\ 11 L:i w :'i "] ,/ \. // -' ,-2 ..!t'..,,-., . .... ' '.-) \. --....:- -.,- DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS rC