HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.868 of 2011 Date : 07.02.2011 Between : Kanna Parabrahmeswara Rao. …..Petitioner And The Superintendent of Police, Guntur & others. …..Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.868 of 2011 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks declaration by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in continuing the rowdy sheet opened against him, as illegal and arbitrary. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a permanent resident of Repalle in Guntur District. It is his grievance that he was falsely implicated in some crimes in the years 2004 and 2006, and inspite of his acquittal by the competent Courts, the rowdy sheet is being continued against him illegally and arbitrarily. Counter affidavit is filed by the 4th respondent- Station House Officer. In the counter, while denying the various allegations made by the petitioner, it is stated that the petitioner was involved in Crime No.51/2002 on the file of Adavuladeevi P.S., registered for the offences under Sections 498-A, 324 and 506 of IPC, in Crime No.100/2004 on the file of Repalle P.S., registered for the offence under Section 479 r/w.411 of IPC and in Crime No.17/2005 on the file of Adavuladeevi P.S., registered for the offences under Sections 307, 109 and 12-B of IPC. In the counter itself, it is stated that in Crime No.51/2002, the petitioner was acquitted by the competent Court on 26.06.2004, in Crime No.100/2004, he was acquitted on 17.03.2006 and in Crime No.17/2005, he was acquitted on 23.02.2006. It is submitted that though no fresh cases are registered against the petitioner, to watch his movements, the rowdy sheet opened against him is being continued. Even as per the Police Standing Orders, once a rowdy sheet is opened, it is to be reviewed periodically at the end of each calendar year, by assessing the conduct of such person. Even according to the respondents, by 17.03.2006, the petitioner was acquitted in all the cases registered against him, and thereafter, no fresh cases have been registered. In the absence of any conviction recorded in the crimes registered against the petitioner and in the absence of registration of any fresh cases, it cannot be said that he is a habitual offender, so as to continue the rowdy sheet opened against him. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed and the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner on the file of the 4th respondent-Police Station, is hereby quashed. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner involves in any further crimes, this order will not preclude the respondents from opening a fresh rowdy sheet against him. No costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 7th February 2011 ajr