Mohammed Basheer @ Basheer v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in opening a Rowdy Sheet against the petitioner and continuing the same as illegal, improper, arbitrary and violative of the law laid down by this Honourable Court and consequently direct the respondents to close the same forlhwith. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI P.KRISHNA PRAKASH Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOUT{ABLE SI{I IUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR I//RIT PETITION No.23762 of 2025 ORDER Ilcard learncrl couriseI for the petitioner and IVLSrinivas, Icarrcd Assistant Governmcnt Pleader for Homc appcaring for rcsporxlent Nos.1 to 5 Wit[-r thcir cormcr-rt lhis r.vrit pctition is taken up for clisposal at thc admission sta11c itsc li

2. This rvrit pctition is lilcd sceking follou.ing prayer:- "Lo det:Lnre Lln itttion o.f tlrc resltondettts itt oputing rL llorL dy SlLeet ngrfitst tlrc pc,itroner nnd conLirtuntg tlr snnc ns illegt , ittrytroyer, nrltitmnl tnd i.tolttitL' o.f tltc hnr ldrl doun br1 this I lltourtltk' Cttrtrt tuLrl ar .ctlLtcntlV rlirccl tltc respondents to closc 'lr sntne forLluoiLlt."

3. Bricf facts sti. ted in this writ petition are that the peti:ioncr was falsely irnpli6nlr.-..1 in a crinrinal casc antl zride Judgment dated 16.04.2119 in S.C.No.354 o1 2013, lhe l.carned lLrrige, Ftrst'l'rack Court curn X Aclditionrl lvlSJ, scntcnccd thc- petitiorrcr to t ntlcrgo irnprisonment for 10 years and pav a fir-re oi Rs.2,000/- in dcfaulI simple imprisonmcnt for 6 months for l.[rc offcnce undcr' Section 37(2) (i) lI']C antl also undergo irnprisonment of 7 r,ears anrl pav a finc of Rs.2,000/- in dcl,rult to undcrgo sirnplc imprisonmcnt lor 6 n-Lonths for the offence uncler Secti,n 363 II'C and acquitted the petitioner 'or offence under Section 341 IPC. Apgrier.ecl bv the [udgment dated 16.04.2019 in S.C.No.35.1 of 2013, petitioner prc[c'r'retl Crl-A.No.343 of 2019 and this Co,.rrt z)ldc iuc]lgment clatcd 20.09.2022, passecl the following orclcr:- "2/ . ln tlrc rretlt, tllc appcnl is nlLotL,ed-in pnrt. 'l'he ctnt,,it:lion of tlp nppcllLltlt-i.\ used t'or IIrc offt't'Lt:e urtder SectLott 376 (2) (t) IPC 2 .l and.,senLenc?. of rigorous itttprtson ntertt Jbr n periotl of len years is set lo.tueaer, tlLe nppellant-nL:cr.Lsc,7 is conz,tctei yo, "the aside.. ot'fence punishabLe unler Seciion 376(2) (i) read toith Sectiin 577 liC for attemptin_g to conrnit rape on tlrc pictim gtrl (p.W.2) nntl is sentenced_ to undergo rigorous itnprisonnrcttt for a ptiorl of fioe years. FurtlLer, tlrc cont,ictiott antl ,rritr,rru of rigo)ous iltptLt5lll lbr tlr oi.{ctt, t. ll,nislnble tmp,risonmenL .fbr seoen !€ars under Sectiort 366 IPC is modit'tcrl to thait of rigoritts irnprisonntent for fiue ycars. Tlte fute atLounts 4t e confiin elrl. Both ttrc scntctrces sltnll nut ton(u rrcnllu.' 4 Learned counser for the petitfoner submits trrat trre petitioner hatr served the entire sentencc and r,r,as relgased from prison and is presentlv cking out his livelihood as a key maker. -fhrr case of the pctitior-rer is that in the ycar 2[)12, respondent No.5 has openecl a ro\^,d1, shcct in Bahadurpura policc Statio. and asked the petitr..cr [o .oport berore trre 'f.rsk Forcc tearn on 3,..r ancl 5th of every month and sir-rcc thcrr^ the pctitioncr u,as cornpll.ing w.ith the dircction of respondent No.5. I-ear4ed c.ur-rscr for the petitioner fulthcr submits that now the petitior.rer intcntrp to go for Um'ah (I{orv P grimagc t. lvlccca) for which hc had to obtarn ipassport f rom thc. au thority and the pctitio.er was i.lormecl that if the ror,r.dy sr.reet pe.cli.g against rrim is not cl.scd, the pctitioner would not bc issul:cl passpor.t. Hence, thc petitioner filed this writ petition seeking dircction to'responcient No.5 to crose trre r.wd' >heet penlling aga inst him. 5 with respect to thd:ibove, reartned .Assistant Go'ernment preader for Flome appearing for respondents Nos.l ,to 5l-ras acceded, however, by relying on ihe paragraph No.ll of the counter of r-esponclent No.4, learned Assistar-rt Governrne^t pleadcr submittecl that thgre is neecl to keep surveillance over all t[-Le r.wcly sircetcrs i.cludi.g the pctitiorirer, elsc lar,r.ressness woulcr prevail rn the ir** societv. l,earned As;istant Gr:rvcrmncnt I'leadcr further submits that if the ron'clv shcct is closed agailLsl the pctitioner, he might again indulg: in sirnilar offences ancl in the public intelest, it is neccssary to keep closc watch agarnst thc petitioner's actl\,itjoi

6. Pcr contra, iealnetl counscl fol thc Lrctitioner submits ll-L;rt il thc pctitioner is kept undcr survcillancc and if ror.r'clv sheet is not closbi:I, thc autholities mav not permit tl-rc pc itioncr to obtain the passport and lca vc the countrv for performing Umrah a[ Mccca and prat, this Cclurt to c]ir ect the r-espondent authorities to consrlcr the pchLioner's case and close the rt,n'dy sheet pencling against hirn 7 I laving cons Llt,red the above subnrissions and in vici^,' of the iact that the petitioner has alre.rcll, sen,ed the sentence and has been r eleased and since thcrc arc no case j pencling against the petitioner, this Court rleems it appropria[e to dirc-'l tl're responclent atrthoritics to close th: pending rorvdv sheert against thc Lrt liLioner. Ii is rnade clear that once the pcl.ition(:l' is rctuned from Umrah, l-rc shi {1 be kept under survcillance for a period of six montl'r

8. Wittr thc abt vc clirc.ctions, this rvril pctition is dispos,:c1 of. lvliscellaneous applictrtions, iI anv per.rcling, shall stancl closcd. No order as to costs SD/- T. SRINIVASA REDD\ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTIO OFFICER To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretarial Buildings, State of Telangana, H Tderabad.

2. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad, Police Commissicnerate office, Hyderguda, Basheerabagh, Hyderabad, Telangana State. I .' ----. a.:-:r.r'i,., --. @J+ '- *_,*{ "--Riaet I I

3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, South Zone, Chatta Bazar, Pathar Gatti, Hyderabad, Telangana State. I I

4. The Assistant Commissioenr of Police, Falaknama Division, Falaknama, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

5. The Station House Officer, Bahadurpula Police Station, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad \

6. One CC to SRI P.KRISHNA PRAKAShI, Advocate. [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] B. Two CD Copies. BSK PVL HIGH COURT DATED:20101112025 ORDER WP.No.23762 ot 2025 t I '-: ?1:: ji;. 1 t ir -:- t; 14 ,€ o; 2 5 AU8 206 <( t' I ,i ,lo .r-.) /: ' \, -.,. \.{ \ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS .>..- \