IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.15529 of 2010 BETWEEN Azam Shareef. ... PETITIONER AND The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad and two others. ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. K. RAMAKANTH REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following order: ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks direction by way of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in opening, renewing and continuing the rowdy sheet dated 26.10.1996 against him, as illegal and arbitrary and in violation of Police Standing Orders. 2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioner is a practicing Advocate and is also Sajjada-Nasheen of Darga- Meer-Mahmood-Aulia, Attapur village, Ranga Reddy District. Certain crimes were registered against the petitioner during the period 1996- 2002 as under: 1. Cr.No.200 of 1996 under Sections 147, 148, 302 r/w 149 IPC. 2. Cr.No.145 of 1997 under Sections 147, 148, 363, 302 r/w 149 IPC. 3. Cr.No.241 of 2002 under Sections 353, 290 IPC. 4. Cr.No.298 of 2002 under Sections 447, 506, 323, 324 r/w 34 IPC. 5. Cr.No.369 of 2002 under Sections 147, 148, 302 r/w 109 IPC. In view of the aforesaid crimes, alleging that the petitioner is habituated to commit crimes, a rowdy sheet was opened against him on 26.10.1996 in exercise of powers under Order 742 of the Andhra Pradesh Police Standing Orders. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was falsely implicated in the aforesaid crimes and in all the cases, referred to above, he was tried and he was acquitted. It is further stated that no crime was registered against the petitioner after 2002 and without taking note of the said fact, the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner in 1996 is renewed from year to year mechanically. 4. The Inspector of Police, Rajendranagar Police Station, has filed counter affidavit giving the particulars of crime registered against the petitioner. It is stated that in all the aforesaid crimes the petitioner was acquitted after trial but in view of his involvement in the aforesaid crimes, the rowdy sheet was opened and is being continued by reviewing the same periodically. The respondents have not denied the allegation of the petitioner that no cases were registered against him from 2003 onwards. 5. It is now fairly well settled that once rowdy sheet is opened as per the Police Standing Orders, it has to be periodically reviewed taking note of the conduct of the petitioner. Although it cannot be said that there is no reason for opening rowdy sheet in the year 1996, but from 2003 onwards there are no allegations of involvement of petitioner in any crime. More so, when the petitioner was acquitted in all the cases prior to 2008 and in the absence of any further crime registered against the petitioner, there appears no reason for continuing the rowdy sheet opened against him. Therefore, I do not find any justifiable reason for continuing the rowdy sheet against the petitioner. 6. For the aforesaid reasons, I deem it appropriate to quash the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner on 26.10.1996, which is being renewed from time to time. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner is involved in any further crime, it is always open to the respondents to open a fresh rowdy sheet against him. The writ petition is accordingly allowed with the aforesaid directions. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J January 19, 2011 DSK