Petitioner seeks cessation of rowdy sheet entry after acquittal. Court directs competent authority to dispose of a representation per prior judgments and disposes of writ.
Competent authority directed to dispose of representation dated 29.01.2018 to close the rowdy sheet.
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 A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
W.P.NO.7781 OF 2018
O R D E R
The grievance of the petitioner is that though the criminal cases filed against him in S.C.Nos.182 of 2013 and 563 of 2015 on the file of VII Additional District Judge, Mahabubnagar, ended in acquittal by judgments dated 29.09.2015 and 28.06.2017 respectively, and that no other cases were registered against him, respondents are continuing the rowdy sheet opened against him on 18.08.2013 and interfering with his life and liberty, contrary to Police Standing Order No.742. Hence, he made a representation to the 3rd respondent - Assistant Commissioner of Police, Shadnagar, Rangareddy District, for closing the rowdy sheet, but no action has been taken. Hence the writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of this court in K.SURESH BABU v. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANANTAPUR DISTRICT1 .
Heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
Since the petitioner is stated to have made a representation dated 29.01.2018, the competent authority is directed to dispose of the said representation in terms of the above judgment of this court and also the judgment rendered by this court in W.P.No.45130 of 2017, dated 02.01.2018.
With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of.
1 2016(1) ALD (Crl.) 210
Interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. No
costs.
DATE:03—08—2018
AVS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the continuing maintenance of a rowdy sheet against the petitioner violates his right to life and liberty amidst acquittals in criminal cases.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
K.SURESH BABU v. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANANTAPUR DISTRICTRelied on¶5
Petitioner
Assistant Commissioner of Police, Shadnagar
A.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
