IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 16367 of 2008 Between: 1 V. Mallikharjuna Chowdary S/o. V. Sree Ramulu R/o. H.No.3/41, Alur Road, Kurnool. 2 V. Siva Prasad S/o. V. Sree Ramulu R/o. H.No.3/41, Alur Road, Kurnool. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND 1 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by The Superintendent of Police, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 2 The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Adoni, Kurnool District. 3 The Station House Officer, Chippagiri Police Station, Chippagiri Mandal, Kurnool District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction declaring the action of the respondents in opening the rowdy sheet bearing No.481 and 482 against the petitioners and continuing the same as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents to close the rowdy sheet that has been opened against the petitioners in the 3rd respondent police station pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.O.MANOHER REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 16367 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in opening rowdy sheet Nos..481 and 482 against the petitioners in the 3rd respondent-police station and continuing the same as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to close the same. It is the case of the petitioners that they were charged with the offences under Sections 12-B, 109, 148, 302, 307 read with 149 I.P.C. and Section 25(1)(B)(a) of the Arms Act and they were acquitted after full trial by the competent Criminal Court. As soon as the case was registered, rowdy sheets were opened against the petitioners. However, during the pendency of the trial, they were closed. Again after the acquittal, the same were reopened, in view of the fact that a case under section 107 of Cr.P.C. was lodged against the petitioners to bind over them. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, unless a person has committed more than two grave offences, a rowdy sheet cannot be opened against such person. Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents did not dispute the fact that the only case lodged against the petitioners ended in acquittal. Under those circumstances, I am of the opinion that the rowdy sheets could not have been opened against the petitioners, only in view of the fact that they were bound over under Section 107 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the respondents are directed to close the rowdy sheet Nos.148 and 149 opened against the petitioners forthwith. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 17.12.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 16367 of 2008 Date: 17.12.2008 JSU