IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND TEN WRIT PETITION No.2367 of 2010 Between: Narendruni Linga Murthy and others. … Petitioners And The Government of Andhra Pradesh, reptd., by its Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Sri G.Simhadri. Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Home. This Court made the following: ORDER:- This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in opening Rowdy Sheets against the petitioners, as illegal and unconstitutional. I have heard Sri G.Simhadri, learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. The petitioners, who claim to be inter-related, were involved in Crime No.350 of 2005 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 307 and 120-B IPC. The said crime was numbered as S.C.No.116 of 2008 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Suryapet. After a full-fledged trial, the petitioners were acquitted of the charges by judgment, dated 19-3-2009. The petitioners pleaded, and it is not denied by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, that the said judgment has become final as no appeal against the same was filed. While the above mentioned case was pending, respondent No.2 opened rowdy sheets against the petitioners. The grievance of the petitioners is that while opening the rowdy sheets itself is unwarranted, no steps were taken to close the rowdy sheets, at least after acquittal of the petitioners from the said case. No counter-affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents. At the hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submitted that the petitioners were involved only in one criminal case; and that after their acquittal in that case, they are not found involved in any other offences. In my considered opinion, continuing rowdy sheets against the petitioners, after their acquittal in the Sessions Case, is not justified in law and none of the clauses of Standing Order 601 are attracted in the case of the petitioners. For the above mentioned reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed and respondent No.2 is directed to close the rowdy sheets against the petitioners. ------------------------------------ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Date:10-3-2010 MNR