HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.28927 of 2008 Date: September 21, 2011 Between: Nakka Venu, S/o.Bhumaiah … Petitioner And Government of Andhra Pradesh, Home Department, rep. by Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others … Respondents Order: This writ petition is filed seeking mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondent-Station House Officer, Chaderghat Police Station, Hyderabad in continuing rowdy sheet Nos.15 and 16, respectively, opened against the petitioners on 25.11.2004 as illegal and arbitrary. The case of the petitioners is that they are residents of Shanker Nagar, Old Malakpet, Hyderabad; the 1st petitioner is a daily-wage worker and the 2nd petitioner is a mechanic and they were falsely implicated in certain crimes and basing on the same, the aforesaid rowdy sheets were opened against them. It is their grievance that though they are acquitted in the said crimes registered against them, respondents are continuing the said rowdy sheets without any valid reason. In the counter-affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent- Station House Officer, Chaderghat Police Station, it is stated that the petitioners were involved in Cr.No.945/2003 registered for the offences under Sections 302, 109, 120-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1890 on the file of Narayanaguda Police Station, Cr.No.1592 of 1995 registered for the offences under Section 302 read with 34 of IPC and Cr.No.510 of 2004 for the offence under Section 324 IPC. It is further stated that the petitioners, earlier, filed W.P.No.8107 of 2005, in which directions were issued to review their case for discontinuance of rowdy sheets, but, the 1st petitioner, Mr.Nakka Venu, is further involved in Cr.No.271 of 2007 under Sections 25(i) (a) of the Arms Act on the file of the Chaderghat Police Station and Cr.No.464 of 2007 under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC. It is stated that in view of the involvement of the 1st petitioner in the two crimes referred above, rowdy sheet is being continued and renewed from time to time. It is also stated that the 2nd petitioner is associated with the 1st petitioner in committing offences; as such, the rowdy sheet opened against him is also to be renewed from time to time. During the course of hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that even in all the cases which are referred above petitioners are acquitted. It is submitted that in the case registered subsequent to the year 2007, i.e. Cr.No.464 of 2007, the 1st petitioner is acquitted and the 2nd petitioner is not involved in any case after acquittal in earlier cases registered against him. In view of the involvement of the 1st petitioner in crimes of serious nature, in association with the 2nd petitioner, I deem, it is not a fit case to direct the respondents to close the rowdy sheets opened against them. As it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the both the petitioners are acquitted from all the cases registered against them, even from those which are registered against them subsequent to the year 2007, I permit them to file a representation to the respondents seeking closure of the rowdy sheets opened against them and if any such representation is filed, I am sure, the respondents-Police will consider the same and take appropriate decision for continuance or otherwise of the rowdy sheets opened against the petitioners and communicate the same to them. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ___________________ (R.SUBHASH REDDY, J) September 21, 2011 MRR