IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU WRIT PETITION NO : 26176 of 2008 Between: Smt.V.M.S.Zareena W/o. Sirajuddin Door No. 8-25-3, Mohanlal Street, Wynchipeta, Vijayawada-1. Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada, Krishna District. 2 The Sub Inspector of Police, Suryaraopet Crime Police Station, Vijayawada. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue writ, order or direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in threatening the petitioner and her family members with dire consequences without there being any crime as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and against the Fundamental Rights which was guaranteed under the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents with the life and liberty of the petitioner and her family members and to take immediate action on the complaint given by the petitioner on 22-11-2008 to 1st respondent and others and be pleased to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.CHALLA AJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.26176 of 2008 ORAL ORDER: According to the learned counsel for petitioner, two criminal cases were booked against petitioner’s husband and both of them ended in acquittal. Further, a rowdy sheet has been opened against petitioner’s husband at Nunna Rural Police Station, Vijayawada and the same is still continuing and under the guise of the same, Police are harassing petitioner and her family members time and again. According to the learned counsel, only if there are more than two case are pending, then only rowdy sheet can be opened, therefore opening of rowdy sheet against the petitioner’s husband itself is arbitrary and illegal. Since it is admitted by the learned counsel appearing for respondents that unless there are more than two cases, no rowdy sheet can be opened, I am of the view that it is always open for the husband of the petitioner is directed to make a representation to the first respondent within a period of one week from today. On filing such representation, the first respondent shall consider and review as to closing of rowdy sheet against the petitioner’s husband on or before 31.10.2008 in the routine review of such cases. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 23.12.2008 DA THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.No.26176 of 2008 23.12.2008