O r d e r: (Per BRSR, J) In response to the directions by this Court, the Inspector of Police, Pahadi Shareed Police Station, Ranga Reddy District filed detailed affidavit, in which it is inter alia stated that the petitioner’s husband Mr. Jaffer Ba Suwaid and one Mr. Suleman aged about 17 years are involved in number of cases including the one punishable under Sec. 341, 427 and 506 of IPC. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Law and Order, Cyberabad being the competent authority under the Police Standing Order No. 742 issued proceedings dated 21-3-2005 directing the concerned officer to initiate appropriate proceedings for opening of a rowdy sheet as against the named persons along with three other individuals. Obviously in connection with opening of the rowdy sheets, the officers entrusted with the duty to open the rowdy sheet have obtained the photographs of the above named two persons and also thumb impressions and finger prints in the prescribed proforma as is required in law for opening of the rowdy sheet. The petitioner in the telegram dated 16-4-2005 addressed to this Court did not reveal anything about the involvement of her husband and as well as the said Suleman and registration of cases against them. We have no reason to disbelieve the details of the cases and the crime numbers furnished in the affidavit filed by the Inspector of Police. The petitioner conveniently did not reveal the involvement of her husband in more than one case punishable under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code. We are convinced that it is not a case of any harassment as such by the Police. The concerned officers, on the other hand, in compliance with the directions of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Law and Order, Cyberabad opened rowdy sheets as against the husband of the petitioner and one Suleman along with three others in view of their involvement in more than two cases. However, we do not propose to express any opinion on the question as to the correctness or otherwise of the action suggested by the Deputy Commissioner of Police. It shall be open to the aggrieved person to challenge the said proceedings, if they are so advised. Suffice it to hold that no relief could be granted to the petitioner in this writ petition. The writ petition fails and shall stand accordingly dismissed. ________________________ B.Sudershan Reddy, J. 6th June, 2005 __________________________ Ramesh Ranganathan, J. grr