Allowed

Sri Anil R v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC3 Jun 2026WP/37358/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged the maintenance of a rowdy sheet opened under Section 110 Cr.P.C. arguing he was acquitted in the only proceeding against him. The High Court of Karnataka allowed the petition, finding the rowdy sheet unsustainable as it requires habitual offending, and issued mandamus for its cancellation.

What did the court decide?

The petition was allowed. Mandamus was issued directing the Police Inspector to cancel and delete the rowdy sheet within two weeks from receipt of the order.

Sri Anil R Vs the State of Karnataka — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:26208 WP No. 37358 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 3^RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 37358 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI ANIL R S/O SRI RAMAKRISHNA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT NO.62, 3RD MAIN ROAD, MUNIRAMANNA BLOCK, GANGANAGAR, BENGALURU-560032

¶10

…PETITIONER

¶11

(BY SRI. NAGENDRA H C.,ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001

¶15

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BENGALURU CITY, INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU.

¶16

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE BANGALORE NORTH, YESHWANTHAPURA CIRCLE, REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX,

¶17

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:26208 WP No. 37358 of 2025

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

BENGALURU-560001

¶20

THE POLICE INSPECTOR R T NAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY-560032 REP BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BENGALURU-1

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI.DEVARAJ C.H., GA FOR R1 TO R4)

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR DIRECTION DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.4POLICE INSPECTOR, R.T. NAGAR POLICE STATION, BENGALURU, TO FORTHWITH CANCEL AND DELETE THE ROWDY SHEET OPENED AND MAINTAINED AGAINST THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 110 OF CR.P.C AND ETC.

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The Petitioner is before this court seeking for the following reliefs:

¶28

a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent No.4 Police Inspector, R.T. Nagar Police Station, Bengaluru, to forthwith cancel and delete the rowdy sheet opened and maintained against the petitioner under Section 110 of Cr.P.C,

¶29

b) Declare the action of opening and continuing the rowdy sheet against the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India,

¶30

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:26208 WP No. 37358 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

c) Direct the respondents to expunge the petitioner's name from all police records, surveillance lists, or registers maintained in offenders, relation to habitual;

¶33

d) Call for records of the R.T.Nagar police station.

¶34

e) Grant such other or further reliefs as this Hon'ble. Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶35

A rowdy sheet was opened against the petitioner since he was arrayed as accused No.2 in CC No.6643 of 2021 arising out of Crime No. 157 of 2020 registered by R.T.Nagar Police Station for offences under Sections 332, 353, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC.

¶36

The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is, apart from the said criminal proceedings, there are no other criminal proceedings which have been ever filed against the petitioner. Learned HCGP confirms the same. If that be so, it does not stand to reason as to how a rowdy sheet could have been opened only on the basis of one criminal proceeding pending against the petitioner, more so when subsequently the said proceedings have also ended in acquittal.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:26208 WP No. 37358 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

For a rowdy sheet to be opened, it is required that the person against whom the said rowdy sheet is opened is a habitual criminal offender, who is involved in several offences which have an impact on the general public. None of the grounds being satisfied, I am of the considered opinion that the order passed by the respondent in opening the rowdy sheet is not sustainable either in law or facts. As such, I pass the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

i. The petition is allowed.

¶43

ii. Mandamus is issued directing respondent No.4-Police Inspector to cancel and delete the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order

¶44

Sd/(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

¶45

LN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55

Sri Anil R v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Anil R v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Avg Logistics Limited Vs South Western Railway

Smt. Sushila Nanjappa Vs the Deputy Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

M/S Minerva Academy Football Club Sports Authority of India Vs Deputy Director

M/S Dreams of Fountains Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Karnantaka

M/S Yogesh Digital Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Jayanthi. K Vs the Commissioner