THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION No.26953 of 2009 Dated: 08.10.2010 Between: Mohd. Osman .. Petitioner. And The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, Hyderabad, And another. .. Respondents. ORDER: The petitioner states that on the basis of a criminal case in S.C.No.2 of 2008 on the file of the Special Judge for the Trial of Offences under S.Cs. & S.Ts (POA) Act-cum-VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad, which arose out of Crime No.237 of 2006 of Mirchowk Police Station, Hyderabad, in which he was arrayed as Accused No.2, a rowdy sheet No.824/2/MC.DIV/06 was opened against him in Mirchowk Police Station. His grievance is that except the said S.C.No.2 of 2008, no other case is registered against him in any of the police stations, and despite his acquittal in the said S.C.No.2 of 2008, the said rowdy sheet is being continued against him in Mirchowk Police Station and, therefore, he submitted a representation to the 1st respondent on 10.01.2009 requesting to give instructions to the 2nd respondent to close the rowdy sheet being continued against him at Mirchowk Police station, but the same is not considered till date. Hence, this writ petition is filed seeking appropriate directions to the respondents to close the rowdy sheet being continued against the petitioner in Mirchowk Police Station. Respondent No.2 filed counter stating that four criminal cases were registered against the petitioner – Crime No. 237 of 2007 of Mirchowk Police Station, which was subsequently numbered as S.C. No. 2 of 2008 on the file of the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad, ended in his acquittal on 28.07.2008; Crime No. 99 of 2007, he was bound over for good behaviour; Crime No.152 of 2008, he was bound over for good behaviour and; Crime No. 186 of 2009, he was bound over for good behaviour. It is further stated that no fresh criminal cases are registered against the petitioner on the file of Mirchowk Police Station and that even though the murder case registered against him and others ended in acquittal, it does not entitle the petitioner to seek closure of the rowdy sheet against him. It is stated that except keeping a close watch on the activities of the petitioner and continuing the rowdy sheet against the petitioner from time to time, in the absence of which there are every chances of the petitioner indulging in unlawful activities, the police never summoned the petitioner to the police station nor detained him in the police station as alleged in the affidavit. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents. Though the murder case registered against the petitioner and others ended in acquittal, it does not entitle the petitioner to seek closure of rowdy sheet opened and continued against him. However, since no other serious cases have been registered against the petitioner subsequent to closure of the murder case registered against him, the 2nd respondent-Inspector of Police, Mirchowk Police Station, Hyderabad, is directed to examine the case of the petitioner as to whether the rowdy sheet continued against him on the file of Mirchowk Police Station can be closed, and pass appropriate orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. _____________ C.V.RAMULU,J 08.10.2010 v v