HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24775 of 2010 Date: 15.11.2010 Between : Sadiq @ Sadiq-Bin-Hussain. …….Petitioner And The State of A.P., rep. by Principal Secretary (Home Department) & others. ….Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24775 of 2010 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in continuing/retaining the rowdi-sheet opened against him vide rowdi-sheet No.8 on the file of the Sub-Inspector of Police, Nirmal Town of Adilabad District, as illegal and arbitrary. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the petitioner has studied upto intermediate and eking out his livelihood by doing civil contracts. It is stated that due to group politics in the village, false cases were registered against the petitioner in Crime Nos.1/90, 33/89, 170/89 and 190/89 and in all the 4 cases, he was acquitted of the charges levelled against him. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that inspite of the fact that no fresh case is registered against him, and though he was already acquitted in all the 4 cases registered against him in 1989 and 1990, the rowdi-sheet opened against him is being continued without any basis and contrary to the Police Standing Orders. Counter affidavit is filed by the 4th respondent. In the counter, while referring to the 4 crimes registered against the petitioner, it is stated that though no fresh cases are registered against the petitioner, as the petitioner is young and active, to have a close watch on his activities, the rowdi-sheet is being continued. It is well settled that once a rowdi-sheet is opened, it is to be renewed periodically at the end of the year, taking into account the involvement of such person in any other offence, and also the judgments rendered in the cases registered against him. Even from the counter affidavit, it is clear that except registration of 4 cases against the petitioner in 1989 and 1990, no other case is registered against him, thereafter. Merely stating that the petitioner is young and active, it is not open for the respondent- Police to continue the rowdi-sheet opened against him. This Court, in the case of Sunkara Satyanarayana Vs. State of A.P.[1], has elaborately considered the power of Police in opening the rowdi-sheets and history sheets and also the basis for continuing such proceedings. Even applying the ratio laid down in the aforesaid judgment, in the absence of registration of any fresh case against the petitioner after 1990, and in view of the acquittal recorded by competent Courts in all the 4 cases registered against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that there is no ground to continue the rowdi-sheet opened against the petitioner. For the aforesaid reasons, rowdi-sheet No.8, opened against the petitioner, is hereby quashed. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner is involved in any further crime, this will not preclude the respondent-Police from opening a fresh rowdi- sheet against him. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 15th November 2010 ajr [1] 1999 ALT (6) 249