THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.17139 of 2006 Between: Mohd. Abdul Najeem. .. PETITIONER and The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad and another. .. RESPONDENTS ORDER: Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. It is stated that pursuant to registration of Cr.No.312 of 1991 of Chatrinaka Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 148, 149 and 307 IPC and 25 of Indian Arms Act, rowdy sheet No.7/91 was opened against the petitioner. It is stated that after investigation, charge- sheet was filed and it was numbered as S.C.No.247 of 1997 on the file of IV Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad and the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the petitioner through judgment dated 03-04-2000. It is stated that after opening rowdy sheet, the petitioner shifted his residence to the police limits of Pahadishareef and therefore, the rowdy sheet was transferred to Pahadishareef Police Station. It is stated that the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner was renewed from time to time every year. Therefore, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to delete the name of the petitioner from Rowdy Sheet No.7/1991 in view of acquittal of the petitioner in S.C.No.247 of 1997. A stand has been taken by the respondent stating that mere acquittal of the petitioner in the criminal case does not automatically entitle him to close the rowdy sheet as per Police Standing Order 602. A perusal of the Police Standing Order 602 goes to show that merely because a suspected/rowdy, having a history sheet, is not figuring as an accused in the previous five years after the last case in which he was involved, it should not preclude the authorities to continue his history sheet if the authorities is of the considered view that the activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order or one affecting peace and tranquility in the area or the victims are not coming forward to give complaint against him on account of threat from him. In the instant case, admittedly, the criminal case pending against the petitioner was acquitted by the IV Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, on 03-04-2005 in S.C.No.247 of 1997. Further, no reasons have been furnished about the activities of the petitioner as to how his activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order or one affecting peace and tranquility in the area. Admittedly, no cases are pending against the petitioner. Therefore, I am of the opinion that there is no justification on the part of the respondents in continuing the rowdy sheet against the petitioner even for the purpose of surveillance. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that no cases are pending against the petitioner, the writ petition is allowed directing the respondents to close the rowdy sheet pending against the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 18-06-2007 Prv