Allowed

Malligari Raju , Dobba Raju v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Dec 2020WP/15586/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging the continued maintenance of a rowdy sheet against the petitioner for ten years post-acquittal. The court found no justification for the interference with life, liberty, and privacy, directing the respondents to close the sheet immediately.

What did the court decide?

The rowdy sheet against the petitioner was directed to be closed immediately and the petitioner was to be intimated.

Malligari Raju , Dobba Raju Vs The… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF DECETVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶6

wRtT PETTTTON NO. 15586 0F 2020

¶7

Betwee n:

¶8

Malligari Raju @ Dobba Raju, S/o. Yadagiri, aged 40 years, Occ: Business, R/o. Dharmakancha, Jangoan.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, represented by it Secretary Home Department,

¶12

B,R K.Bhavan, Hyderabad.

¶13

1. The Director-General of Police, Telangana State, Hyderabad. 3. The Commissioner of Police, Warangal Commissionerate, Warangal. 4. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Jangaon. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Jangaon.

¶14

1. The State House Officer, Jangaon PS, Jangaon Town and District.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more^particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents more particularly the respondents No.2 to 6 in continuing with the rowdy sheet against the^petitioner and thereby harassing the petitioner by the respondents 4 to 6 under the pretext openinfiowOy sheet as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of principles of natural Justice, fair play?-nd in violation of Art. 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently quash the rowdy sheet against the petitioner.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay the rowdy sheet with a consequential direction to the respondents not to call upon the petitioner to the police station under the pretext of rowdy sheet.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D. V. CHALAPATHI RAO

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR HOME

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶24

WRIT PETITION No.15586 OF 2O2O

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents.

¶27

Petitioner claims to be a businessman doing real estate business in and around the town of Jangaon. He alleges that people inimical to him and lr,ho bore grudge against him, implicated him in a false case in Crime No.257 of 2OO7 registered lor the offence under Section 3O2 r lw 34 l.P.C. On the ground that petitioner was implicated in a criminal case registered for the offence punishable under Section 302 I.P.C., a rondy sheet rvas opened. Petitioner was shown as accused No.3 in S.C.No.405 of 2OO8 on the file of III Additional Sessions Judge, Warangal. Alter full trial, the trial Court rendered judgment on 24.12.2O1O acquitting the petitioner ol the charge levelled against him. In this writ petition, petitioner alleges that even though he was acquitted after full trial, rowdy sheet opened against him is not revoked and the same is continued for the last ten years.

¶28

In the counter af{idavit, respondents referred to Crime No.257 ol 2OO7 and justified opening of rowdy sheet against the petitioner because of the registration of the said crime. From the averments of the counter affidavit, it is apparent that except for the said crime, there is no other crime registered against the petitioner and rowdy sheet is maintained against him lor surveillance on him.

¶29

¶30

From the material^{on record, it is apparentthat erroneously} police kept the rowdy^{sheetin operation for the last ten years} interfering with the^{life, Iiberty and privacy of the petitioner'} Therefore, I see^{no justificationfor continuation of rowdysheet'}

¶31

The writ petition^{isaccordinglyallowed directing the} respondents to^{forthu'ith close therorT-dysheet and intimatc the} same to the^{petitioncr. Miscellaneouspetitions,ifany pending'}

¶32

stand closed.

¶33

¶34

S DtMMAJI

¶35

ASSISTANT S AR

¶36

,TRUE COPY//

¶37

SECTION OFFICER

¶38

To, 1. The Secretary Home Department, State of Telangana, B.R.K.Bhavan, Hyderabad.

¶39

The Director-General of Police, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

¶40

The Commissioner of Police, Warangal Commissionerate, Warangal.

¶41

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Jangaon.

¶42

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Jangaon.

¶43

The State House Officer, Jangaon PS, Jangaon Town and District.

¶44

One CC to Sri D. V. Chalapathi Rao, Advocate IOPUC]

¶45

Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [ouT]

¶46

Two CD Copies.

N/P

HIGH COURT

DATED:1611212020

ORDER

1 He S TA r€
(
o
(.) isorcm C)
*
D

¶52

WP.No.15586 of 2020

¶53

ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶54

".a.1] tn r e.Dt(4, \ -\ It-^z--q\r)-

Malligari Raju , Dobba Raju v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malligari Raju , Dobba Raju v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kudmeta Shankar Vs The State of Telangana

Narreddy Madhukar Reddy Vs the Commissioner of Police

G. Krishna Reddy and 6 Others Vs The State of T.S. and 14 Others

Kandakatla Krishna Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Khaled Bin Salej Jabri Vs The State of Telangana and 5 Others

Chavan Malan Bai Vs State of Telangana