This order in a writ petition regarding Rowdy Sheet closure granted liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation and directed the authority to consider it within eight weeks.
Liberty granted to petitioner to make fresh representation; competent authority directed to consider it within eight weeks and take action.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.23960 OF 2018
O R D E R :
This writ petition is filed challenging the action of the official respondents in not closing the Rowdy Sheet against the petitioner and also in not considering the representation of the petitioner dated 10.06.2018 requesting to close down the Rowdy Sheet.
The case of the petitioner is that a Rowdy Sheet is opened against the petitioner in the year 2002 and the same is being continued though the petitioner is acquitted in some of the crimes. The petitioner also made representation dated 10.06.2018 to the competent authority to close down the Rowdy Sheet opened against him. As the same is not being considered, present writ petition is filed.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that as petitioner is staying at Abudhabi and obtained Passport from the said place, question of continuing Rowdy Sheet does not arise, since he is not residing here.
On the other hand learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home produced written instructions stating that as many as ten cases were pending against the petitioner vide Crime No.129/2002, under Sections 448, 506 IPC; Crime No.36/2002 under Sections 506, 326 r/w.34 IPC; Crime No.04/2002 under Section 324 IPC; Crime No.84/2005 under Section 326 IPC; Crime No.66/2007
2
under Section 448, 324, 506, 427 IPC; Crime No.742/2003 under Section 324 IPC; Crime No.766/2003 under Section 324 IPC; Crime No.42/2004 under Section 25(1); Crime No.191/2017 under Section 41(a), 107 Cr.P.C. and Petty Case No.1311/2011. He further states that since the representation dated 10.06.2018 stated to be filed by the petitioner goes to show that it is not filed by the petitioner, question of reviewing the Rowdy Sheet opened against the petitioner does not arise.
This Court had an occasion to deal with the similar issue in WP.No.23765/2018, dated 11.07.2018.
In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to make fresh representation stating the above facts to the competent authority and on such filing the competent authority is directed to consider the same and take action in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of representation. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending
in the writ petition, shall stand closed.
A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J
09.08.2018 t k.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can direct the competent authority to reconsider the petitioner's representation for closing the Rowdy Sheet pending against him.
Whether the High Court can grant liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation regarding the Rowdy Sheet closure.
Petitioner
Official Respondents
A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
