Writ Petition No. 22721 of 2024 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15849 WP No. 22721 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 22721 OF 2024 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: 1. SRI CHANDRAHASA S/O THAMMANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.1724, EWS 3RD STAGE, NEAR NEW TOWN BUS STOP, KHB YELAHANKA NEW TOWN BENGALURU - 560 064. (BY SRI. SUDHINDRA D.S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF HOME, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka …PETITIONER - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15849 WP No. 22721 of 2024 3. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BENGALURU NORTH EAST DIVISION, AMRUTHAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 092. 4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE YELAHANKA DIVISION, YELAHANKA SATELLITE TOWN, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU-560 064. 5. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, YELAHANKA NEW TOWN POLICE STATION, BENGALURU-560 064.
Legal Reasoning
RESPONDENT NOS.2 TO 5 ARE REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR/HCGP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BUILDING, BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENTS
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. SHAMANTH NAIK, HCGP) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENT BEARING NO. YNT/PS/CC.NO.111/23 DTD 25.08.23 AS PER ANNEXURE-F AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15849 WP No. 22721 of 2024 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking quashment of an endorsement dated 25.08.2023, which rejects the claim of the petitioner for deletion of his name from the list of rowdies maintained in the fifth respondent police station. 2. Heard Sri. Sudhindra D.S., learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Shamanth Naik, learned HCGP appearing for the respondents. 3. The petitioner is said to have got himself embroiled in 3 crimes, which reads as follows: 1) Crime No.77/2021 offences punishable under Sections 186, 341, 353, 504, 506, 509 read with Section 34 of the IPC. registered for 2) C.C.No.14929/2021. 3) Crime No.22/2022 offences punishable under Sections 269, 270 of IPC and under Section 51(1) of NDM Act, 2005 and under registered for - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15849 WP No. 22721 of 2024 Section 5(3)(a) of the Karnataka Epidemic Diseases Act, 2020. 4. It transpires that in one of the crimes, the police after investigation have filed a 'B' report. In the second crime, the crime has been closed from the petitioner pleading guilty and in the third crime, the petitioner is said to have been convicted. The conviction is for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 355 of the IPC. 5. The petitioner then submits representation to the fourth respondent - the Assistant Commissioner of Police seeking his deletion of his name from the list of rowdies. This comes to be rejected. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the rejection is contrary to the Clause - 1059 of the Police Manual, which enumerates the instances, by which, the name of a particular person can be drawn into the list of rowdies. He further submits that the matter has to be reconsidered by the fourth respondent. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15849 WP No. 22721 of 2024 7. Learned HCGP would refute the submission in contending that there need not be a crime pending or acquittal or otherwise for drawing up of a particular person's name into the list of rowdies. He would seek dismissal of the petition. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the respective submissions made by the learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 9. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. In the light of the prayer being for consideration of the representation of the petitioner for removal of his name from the list of rowdies in the fifth respondent police station, I deem it appropriate to direct the fourth respondent to consider the case of the petitioner, notwithstanding the endorsement in consonance with the law, as laid down by the Co-ordinate Bench in W.P.No.4504/2021 and connected matters disposed on 22.04.2022, wherein the Co-ordinate Bench has laid down certain guidelines. The guidelines so laid down by the Co-ordinate Bench reads as follows: - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15849 WP No. 22721 of 2024 GUIDELINES FOR ROWDY/HISTORY SHEETING: i. Before entering the name of an individual to the Register of Rowdies, the jurisdictional police shall collect and collate the material information concerning him and frame the proposal for registration on that basis. ii. A brief proposal notice shall be sent to the individual concerned in a sealed cover with an option to submit his representation within two weeks as to why his name should not be registered as a rowdy. However, there is no need to afford a personal hearing. In exceptional cases notice may be dispensed with for reasons to be recorded in the Register of Rowdies. iii. iv. v. In terms of Clause (5), Order 1059 of the Manual, the Superintendent of Police or the Sub – Divisional Police Officer shall not accord approval for entering the name of individual concerned to the Register of Rowdies without calling for records and objectively considering the same. He shall briefly record his reasons for according the approval and mark a copy thereof to the individual forthwith, with a mention that he may petition the Police Complaints Authority, against the same. The jurisdictional Police shall compulsorily once in two years, undertake a periodic review of entries in the Register of Rowdies suo motu, as provided under Clause (2), Order 1057 of the Manual. However, it is open to the aggrieved, to make a representation at any time after one year of registration, seeking deletion of name from the Rowdy Register on the basis of changed circumstances such as rectitude, good conduct, social/community service, etc. The representation for review shall be considered by the jurisdictional Police at the initial level within a period of 30 days, during which necessary inputs may be obtained through the available sources as to merits of the claim. The recommendation shall be sent to the jurisdictional Superintendent of Police or the Sub – Divisional Police Officer, within 15 days along with the representation & the material collected thereon. Such recommendation along with the representation shall be communicated to the individual concerned within next 15 days. consideration of result of the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15849 WP No. 22721 of 2024 vi. Any individual aggrieved by the rejection of his representation or continuation of his name in the Register may petition to the Police Complaints Authority ordinarily within 30 days. However, no personal hearing shall avail. The petition shall be disposed off by recording reasons within an outer limit of 60 days, after considering the material on record or the fresh inputs that may be requisitioned, by the authority. vii. viii. The entire process of Rowdy/History Sheeting from the stage of issuance of proposal notice as specified above, up to the issuance of the orders on the petition if any to the Police Complaints Authority, shall be done only in a sealed cover procedure and that nothing therein shall be disclosed nor made available to anyone, except to the aggrieved, nor any Right To Information (RTI) application shall be entertained in this regard. The violation of these guidelines shall constitute a major misconduct and an adverse entry on proof thereof shall be made by the Disciplinary Authority in the Service Register of the erring official after hearing him and a copy thereof shall be marked to the victim of Rowdy Register/History Sheet, without brooking any delay. ix. Whatever guidelines herein above laid down shall be applicable to the case of History Sheeters as well, mutatis mutandis and subject to the provisions of Karnataka Police Manual, 1965. 10. In the light of the order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench supra and the submission made by the learned HCGP, the reconsideration shall happen strictly in consonance with law within three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:15849 WP No. 22721 of 2024 With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE SJK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10