Writ petition challenging the arbitrary continuation of a rowdy history sheet. Court held pending bound-over is not automatic ground for continuation and directed filing of application to Sub Divisional Police Officer.
Director to file an application before Sub Divisional Police Officer, Guntakal, for closure of rowdy sheet No. 216.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU
WRIT PETITION NO.24407 OF 2012
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in continuing the history sheet No.216 against the petitioner in respondent No.2 police station, as arbitrary and illegal and consequently, to quash the same.
2. The petitioner is native of Guntakal Town, Anantapur District. In the year 1997 a criminal case was registered against him in Crime No.50 of 1997 of Guntakal I Town Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with 34 IPC. In the said crime he was arrayed as A.1. Thereafter, the said criminal case was settled before Lok Akalat and he was acquitted on 18.07.1998. On the ground that the above criminal case was registered against him in the year 1997, police have opened history sheet No.214 and continued the same. The respondents have taken his photographs and also insisting his presence in police station on all important days and also at the time of elections.
3. Respondent No.2 filed detailed counter affidavit stating that except bounding over case in Crime No.32 of 2012 under Section 107 Cr.P.C. which is pending, no other fresh cases are registered or pending against the petitioner. Due to fear of the petitioner, no one has come forward to police station and lodge complaint against him. There are oral complaints that the petitioner by posing as a rowdy element threatening innocent persons and doing civil settlements. But, no specific complaint is received in this regard to initiate any action against him. In view of public interest, the respondent police are continuing the rowdy sheet against him. It is open to the petitioner to make representation before the competent authority for closure of the rowdy sheet after bounding over period is over, and the same will be
considered by the authorities basing on the merits.
4. Heard both sides.
5. As per the averments made in the counter affidavit, as on today no criminal case is pending against the petitioner except bounding over the petitioner for a period of one year to keep good behaviour from 05.05.2012 in M.C.No.66 of 2012. Whether that is a ground to be continued or not, has to be decided by the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Guntakal, Anantapur District, in accordance with law, particularly with reference to Standing Order No.601 of A.P. Police Standing Orders.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to file an application before Sub Divisional Police Officer, Guntakal, Anantapur District, for closure of rowdy sheet No. 216 pending against him and thereafter, the same shall have to be decided in accordance with law, particularly with reference to standing order 601 of A.P. Police Standing Orders. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
AUGUST 27, 2012 YVL
_______________ K.C.BHANU, J
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the continuation of the history sheet (rowdy sheet) against the petitioner against the law or arbitrary.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to closure of the rowdy sheet pending against him.
Petitioner
Respondent No.2
K.C.Bhanu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
