IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THIS THE 24th DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010 WRIT PETITION No.11683 of 2006 Between Basa Subramanyam …PETITIONER(S) A N D The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada, Krishna District and another …RESPONDENT(S) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.11683 of 2006 ORDER: The petitioner was shown as accused in Crime No.21/1992 of Nunna (Rural) Police Station, Payakapuram, Vijayawada for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 324 and 302 r/w 149 I.P.C. and in Crime No.246/2005 of Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada, for the offence punishable under Section 110(E)(F) of Cr.P.C. In addition to that, a petty case in Crime No.101/98 of Machavaram Police Station, for the offence punishable under Section 290 I.P.C. was also registered against him. It is alleged that the Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station, opened a rowdy sheet against the petitioner in the year 1992 and the same is being continued. The petitioner challenges the action of the respondents in continuing the rowdy sheet. In the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, the facts mentioned above are not disputed. It is stated that Crime No.21/1992 of Nunna (Rural) Police Station, Payakapuram, Vijayawada, ended in acquittal; in Crime No.246/2005 of Machavaram Police Station, the petitioner was bound over by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central Zone, Vijayawada City, for a period of one year; and in Crime No.101/98 of Machavaram Police Station, tried as S.T.C.80/2008, he was convicted by imposition of a fine of Rs.50/- by the Court of the III Special Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. It is stated that having regard to the conduct and habits of the petitioner, a rowdy sheet is opened and is being continued to watch his movements and activities as per Standing Order No.601(A) of the A.P. Police Manual. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home. The opening of a rowdy sheet will have its own impact upon the personal liberty as well as the dignity of an individual. Such a step can be resorted to only if the circumstances warrant. In the instant case, the petitioner no doubt figured as accused in certain cases. None of them ended up in conviction. Further, no cases are pending against the petitioner as of now. For a man of young age, the continuance of the rowdy sheet, that too without there being any pending cases, would have its own adverse impact. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed and the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J 24th February 2010 CVRK