Disposed

Sri Vijay Kumar v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC9 Jun 2022WP/18221/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged the inaction of police authorities in responding to his application for deletion from the rowdy sheeter list. Citing a coordinate bench judgment, the court mandated compliance with established guidelines regarding review periods and disposal timelines. The writ petition was disposed of directing the authorities to pass appropriate orders.

What did the court decide?

Directed the appropriate authorities to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation within 30 days.

Sri Vijay Kumar Vs State of Karnataka — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.18221 OF 2021 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN

¶8

SRI. VIJAY KUMAR S/O SHANKRAPPA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT KARDHYAL BIDAR - 585413

¶9

... PETITIONER

¶10

[BY MS. GEETA R. SHINDHE, ADV.]

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU - 560001

¶13

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE INFANTRY ROAD BENGALURU - 560001

¶14

¶15

3 . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE SUBRAMANYAPURA SUB-DIVISION NO.23, 1^ST STAGE KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT OPPOSITE KUMARSWAMY POLICE STATION KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT BENGALURU - 560078

¶16

POLICE INSPECTOR KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT POLICE STATION 1^ST STAGE, KUMARSWAMY LAYOUT BENGALURU CITY - 560078

¶17

... RESPONDENTS

¶18

[BY SRI. K.S.ABHIJITH, HCGP]

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.08.2019 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.3 VIDE ANNX-A.

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner is before this Court seeking for writ

¶23

in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 30.08.2019 drawing his name amongst the list of rowdy sheeters.

¶24

¶25

2. Heard Ms.Geeta R. Shindhe, learned counsel

¶26

appearing for the petitioner and Sri. K.S. Abhijith, learned HCGP for the respondents.

¶27

The petitioner is an accused in Crime No.30/2018, registered on 05.02.2018. The Police after investigation have filed a charge sheet in the said crime, wherein the allegations against the petitioner according to the learned counsel is one of being a part of an unlawful assembly.

¶28

Contending no allegation that would be within the Police manual, the petitioner represents during the pendency of the case for deletion of his name from the list of rowdy sheeters.

¶29

The representation is appended to the petition. An acknowledgment of such delivery is also found. It is germane to notice the judgment of the

¶30

¶31

co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.4504/2021 and connected matters rendered on 22.04.2022 laying down specific guidelines as to how the history sheeting of a rowdy should be made. The guidelines read as follows:

¶32

“GUIDELINES FOR ROWDY/HISTORY SHEETING:

¶33

i. Before entering the name of an individual to the Register of Rowdies, the jurisdictional police shall collect and collate the material information concerning him and frame the proposal for registration on that basis.

¶34

ii. A brief proposal notice shall be sent to the individual concerned in a sealed cover with an option to submit his representation within two weeks as to why his name should not be registered as a rowdy. However, there is no need to afford a personal hearing. In exceptional cases notice may be dispensed with for reasons to be recorded in the Register of Rowdies.

¶35

¶36

iii. In terms of Clause (5), Order 1059 of the Manual, the Superintendent of Police or the Sub – Divisional Police Officer shall not accord approval for entering the name of individual concerned to the Register of Rowdies without calling for records and objectively considering the same. He shall briefly record his reasons for according the approval and mark a copy thereof to the individual forthwith, with a mention that he may petition the Police Complaints Authority, against the same.

¶37

iv. The jurisdictional Police shall compulsorily once in two years, undertake a periodic review of entries in the Register of Rowdies suo motu, as provided under Clause (2), Order 1057 of the Manual. However, it is open to the aggrieved, to make a representation at any time after one year of registration, seeking deletion of name from the Rowdy Register on the basis of changed circumstances such as rectitude, good conduct, social/community service, etc.57

¶38

¶39

v. The representation for review shall be considered by the jurisdictional Police at the initial level within a period of 30 days, during which necessary inputs may be obtained through the available sources as to merits of the claim. The recommendation shall be sent to the jurisdictional Superintendent of Police or the Sub – Divisional Police Officer, within 15 days along with the representation & the material collected thereon. Such recommendation along with the result of consideration of the representation shall be communicated to the individual concerned within next 15 days.

¶40

vi. Any individual aggrieved by the rejection of his representation or continuation of his name in the Register may petition to the Police Complaints Authority ordinarily within 30 days. However, no personal hearing shall avail. The petition shall be disposed off by recording reasons within an outer limit of 60 days, after considering the material on record

¶41

¶42

or the fresh inputs that may be requisitioned, by the authority.

¶43

vii. The entire process of Rowdy/History Sheeting from the stage of issuance of proposal notice as specified above, up to the issuance of the orders on the petition if any to the Police Complaints Authority, shall be done only in a sealed cover procedure and that nothing therein shall be disclosed nor made available to anyone, except to the aggrieved, nor any Right To Information (RTI) application shall be entertained in this regard.

¶44

viii. The violation of these guidelines shall constitute a major misconduct and an adverse entry on proof thereof shall be made by the Disciplinary Authority in the Service Register of the erring official after hearing him and a copy thereof shall be marked to the victim of Rowdy Register/History Sheet, without brooking any delay.

¶45

ix. Whatever guidelines herein above laid down shall be applicable to the case of

¶46

¶47

History Sheeters as well, mutatis mutandis and subject to the provisions of Karnataka Police Manual, 1965.”

¶48

Clause Nos.iv and v of the guidelines direct periodic review of the entries in the register in accordance with the Clause(2) Order 1057 of the Police Manual and Clause V directs consideration of a representation given by such accused whose name is found in the list.

¶49

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representation has been given on 30.03.2021 itself and no order is passed.

¶50

In terms of the guidelines laid down by the judgment (Supra) appropriate orders should be passed on the representation given by the petitioner in accordance with law and in terms of the Clauses of the

¶51

¶52

Police manual, within a period of 30 days from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order.

¶53

The Writ petition stands disposed.

¶54

Sd/JUDGE

¶55

Sri Vijay Kumar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Vijay Kumar v. State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K R Prasanna Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Baddu Hemalatha Vs Revathi M

Vishalakshi Anand Vs the State of Karnataka

Shoaib Ur Rahaman Vs the State by

Sri Kshitiz Gurung Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri Jatin Sethi Vs State of Karnataka