Partly allowed

Mohammed Sadiq Shariff v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Mar 2024WP/31639/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the repeated summons by the police and the maintenance of his rowdy sheet, asserting harassment without due process and seeking a declaration of arbitrariness. The respondent contested the claim citing multiple pending criminal cases against the petitioner. The Court balanced the petitioner's allegations against the police's need for surveillance given his criminal record

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to submit a detailed representation on the file of Respondent No.3 enclosing relevant material, including acquittal orders, for the Police authority to review and pass appro

Mohammed Sadiq Shariff Vs The State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2024)

[^32e61

HIGH COURT FOR THE^{STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

FRIDAY, THE FIFTEENTH^{DAY OF MARCH} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FOUR

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY}

¶8

WRIT PETITI ONN O:^{31639 OF 2023}

¶9

Between:

¶10

Mohammed Sadiq Shariff,^{S/o. Mohammed Shareef,aged. about 58 years, Occ;} Business, R/o.^{H.No.1 -10 -27134,Prakash Nagar, Secunderabad.}

¶11

.....PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Telangana,^{represented by its Principal Secretary, Home} Department, Secretariat Building,^Hyderabad.

¶14

The Deputy Commissioner^{of Police, North Zone'Hyderabad, Telangana} State.

¶15

The Assistant Commissioner^{of Police, Begumpet Circle, Hyderabad,} Telangana State.

¶16

The Station House^{Officer, Begumpet, Police Station, Secunderabad,} Telangana State.

¶17

.....RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition Under Article^{226 of lhe constitutionof lndla praying that in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavitfiledtherewith,the High court maybe} pleased to issue an appropriate writ,^{order or Direction more particularly on in} the nature of writ of Mandamus^{by declaringthe action of the Respondent No.4} through his subordinates calling^{the Petitioner to Police Station time and again} under the^guise of investigation^{in misusing theirexecutivepowers as illegal,} arbitrary, violation of executive^{powers and Article14,21 ot the constitutionof} lndia and also contrary^{to the provisionof the code of criminal Procedureand} consequently direct^{the RespondentPolice not to call the Petitionerto Police} Station and harass him.

¶19

|.A.NO:1 OF 2023

¶20

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 direct the Respondent No.4 herein not to call the Petitioner to the Police Station and not the harass him,^pending disposal of the above writ^petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.RAMAKRISHNA

¶22

Counsel forthe Respondents : AGP FOR HOME

¶23

The Court made the folloring ORDER

¶24

{

¶25

¶26

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BTIASKAR^REDDY

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.31639 of 2023

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This Writ Petition, under Article^{226 of th.e Constitutionof India,is} filed by the^{petitioner seekingthe following relief:}

¶30

"...to issue an^{appropriate Writ, Orderor Drection more} Particularlg^{one in} the nature of Wit of^{Mandomus bg declaring the action of tl'Le Respondent} No.4 through his subordinates^{calling the Petitioner to Police Stationtime} and again under tlle^{guiseof tnuestigationinmisusing theirexecutiue} powers as illegat, arbitrary,^{uiolationof executiuepotuersand Article14, 21} of the Constitution of India^{qndalso contraryto the prouisbn of tle Codeof} Ciminat Procedure and.^{consequentlAdirect the ResPondent Policenotto call} the Petitioner to Police^{Stationand harass him...}

¶31

The case of the petitioner^{is that basingon the complaintlodged} by one Naidu Prakash, a^{case in Crime No-345/2O21wasregistered} against him alld others^{for the offencesunder Sections 42O,465,467'} 468, 193 & 12OB IPC and^{after completionof investigation,the} respondent No.4 laid^{charge sheetand the sarne was taken cognizance} as C.C.No.4lO of 2022 on^{the file of XI Additional ChiefMetropolitan} Magistrate at Secunderabadand^{pending for trial. It is furthercase of} the petitioner that he^{was alsoan accused in S'C.No'18O of 2O17 on the} file of XI Additional Chief^{MetropolitalMagistrate, Hyderabadand the} said case ended in acquittal^{vide judgment dated' 29.05.2023. It is also} case of the petitioner that^{except the solitarycase in C.C.No'41O of} 2022, no other case^{is pending against him. However,the respondents-} police are summoning him to^{the policestation and conlininghim for}

¶32

¶33

hours together stating that rowdy sheet/ surveillance sheet is opened against him.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted thatexcept a solitary case, no case is pending against the petitioner and therefore, prayed to close the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner. In support of his submissions, he has rblied upon the judgment in Kharak Singh v. State of U.P. and othersr arrd Vijay Narain Singh v. State of Bihar2, in which, the Hon'ble Apex iCourt held that opening of rowdy sheet and continuing the same wi{hout any valid reason would not characterize a person that he is ha$itually involving rn commission of offences. Learned counsel for the J,rdor.. has further relied on the t judgments in Sunkara Satyanaray{aa v. State of Andhra Pradesh3; I B. Sat5ranarayana Reddy v. State oi noanr" Pradesha; Majld Babu v. I Governnent of Andhra Pradesh^s t KammaBapuJi v. Station House I Oflicer, Brahmasamudram6. He hhs further relied on the judgment inPuttaguataPasi v. Commissioner, of Police, VijayawadaT, in which, the Honble Division Bench has specifically observed that a rowdy sheet could not be opened against an individuat in a casual and mechanical t: manner and due care and caution should be taken by the police before characterizing a person as a rowdy. The learned counsel has placed

¶35

'An^{1963 sc 1295} ran tgt+ sc t33+ 'zooo(r)^{eLo (c'r.) r rz (er)}

¶36

'zooalr;^ero 1ca.;^rsu lary 5tstt1z1 eLT ool

¶37

6reezloy ato sel

¶38

'reea1:1^{arr ss} 1oa;

¶39

¶40

¶41

much reliance on the^judgment in Yerramsettivenugopal Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh and otherss, in which, the learned Single Judge of High Court of Andhra Pradesh while referring to the Standing Orders of A.P. Police Manual and the^principles laid down in the catena of judgments held that history sheet of a rowdy can be continued (i.) if the activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order or affecting peace and tranquility in the area; ii) the victims are not coming forward to give complaint against him on account of threat from him. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondentspolice have not followed the Standing Order Nos.60l,602 and,742 of Police Manual for maintaining the rowdy sheet against the petitioner.

¶42

Per contra, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents, on written instructions dated 15.17.2023, has submitted that petitioner is continuously indulging in commission of lawless acts involving breach of public peace and tranquility and he was involved in various crimes i.e,i) Crime No.345/2O21 registered for the offence under Section 42O, 465, 467, 468, lg3 & 12O(B) IPC, wherein charge sheet has been filed vide CC.No.410/2O22 on tl:re file of Hon'ble l,earned XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Secunderabad and the case is pending tria-l.ii) Cr.No.3gal2ols registered for the offence under S€ction 325, 449, 506, 5O9 IPC, the case has been transferred to CCS. iii)

¶43

'2020(2)^{ALD (crl.)ro4E(A?)}

¶44

¶45

Cr.No.517/2O15 registered for the offence under Section 3O2 r/w 34 IPC the case has been ended in acquittal.ivl Cr.No.42ll2O20 registered for the offence under Sectioo 42O IPC has been compromised.v) Cr.No.82 /2021 registered for the offence under Section 720-8, 427 , 447, 448,503, so6 IPC R/w 34 IPC, & Sec.3(1)(r) & 3(l)(s)of SC ST POA Act 1989, as amended by Act 1 of 2ol6.vi) Cr.No.69/2014 for ttre offence under Section 447 IPC and vii) Cr.No.3l3/2O 14 for the offence under Section 447 lPC. It is further submitted that in view of the involvement of the Petitioner in the above criminal cases and serious illegal acts, it has become incumbent on the part of Police to open a rowdy sheet against the petitioner tc, keep watch on his activities and to curtail unlawful activities. It is submitted that as per the proceedings of Assistant Commissioner of Police, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Telangana State, vide C.No.32OIPS-BW 12016 d,ated, 25.07.2O16 Rowdy Sheet has been opened against the Petitioner on the lile of Begumpet Police Station, Hyderabad, and the same has been renewed and is being continued till date. It is further submitted that except maintaining rowdy sheet to keep surveillance on-the activities of the Petitioner, the Respondent No.4 did not harass the Petitioner nor interfered with his personal life and liberty.

¶46

It is apt to refer to the relevant Standing Orders of A.P. Police Manua.l. Maintenance of rowdy sheets is governed by Standing Order No.60l of A.P. Police Manual, Part-I, Volume II, which reads as under:

¶47

¶48

¶49

"601. The following^persons mau be classified^{as rowdiesand Rowdg} Sheets^{(Form 80) mag be opened} for them^{under the orders of the SP/DCP} and ACP/ SDPO.

¶50

A. Persons who habitua\g^{commit, alremptto @mmitor abet the cpmmission} of olfences inuolving a breach of^{the peace,disturbance to public order and.} sealitA.

¶51

B. Persons bound ouer under^{Sections 106, 1O7, 108(1)(i) and 110(e) and(g)} oJ Cr.P.C.

¶52

C. Persons tuho haue^{been convicted more thanoncein tuo consecutiue} gears under secfbns 59 and^7O of^{the HgderobadAtg Police Act or under} sectton 3, clause^{12, of the AP Touns Nuisances Act.}

¶53

D- Persons tuho habituallg tease^{Luomen and girls and pass indecent} remrrrk-s.

¶54

F. Persons who intimidate bg threats^{or useof phgsicaluiolence or other} unlauful means^{to part} uith^{mouable or immou@ble proPerties or in the habit} of allecting moneg bg^extortion from^{shopkeepers'tradetsand otller} residents-

¶55

G. Persons tDho^inctte and^{instigate communal/casteor political iots}

¶56

H. Persons detained. under^{the "AP Preuentionof Dangerous Actiuities of} Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug^{Olfenders,Goondas,ImmoralTlalfic Ollenders} and. lnnd.-Grabbers Act,^1986" for^{a period of 6 months or more-}

¶57

I. Persons ruho are anvicted for^{olfencesundeithe RePresentotiDesof the} Peoples' Act for^rigging and^{carryingaway fullot paper, Boxesondotler} polling mateiql''

¶58

The period of retention^{of historysheets of suspects/rowdiesis} governed by-standing Order No.602^{of A.P. PoliceManual and the same} reads as follows:

¶59

"6O2-1. History^Sheels of^{suspectsshal! be maintained} fiom^{the date of} registration up^{to the end of December,ofierulhich the ordersol a gazetted}

officer as to th.eir discontinuance or retention for a funher peiod shall be obtained.

¶64

Merelg because a suspect/ rorudg, hauing a history sheet, is /tot figuing as accttsed in the preuious 5 gears ofter the last case in uhich he was tnuolued tt slauld not preclude the Sp/DCp/Cp to continue his history sheet if SP/ DCP/ CP is of the considered uieu that hk activities are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order or one alfecting peace and" tranquillity in the area or th.e uictims are not coming foruard. to giue @ntplolint against him on account of threat from him. "

¶65

Standing Order No.742 of A.p. police Manual deals with the classification of rowdies and opening of rowdy sheets and the same is extracted below:

¶66

"742. Routdies- (1) The fo\owtng persons mag be classified as roudies and Rotodg Sheets (Form 88) mag be opened. for them under the ord.er of the Superintend.ent oJ Police or Sub-dtvisional Off.cer:

¶67

(a) persons who llabituallg (nmmit, auempt to commit or abet the commission of, offences inuoluing a breach of the peace;

¶68

(b) persons bound. ouer under Section-s tO6, 1OZ, IOAG) and lto(t) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act No.2 of 1974);

¶69

(c) persons ula laue been anuicted. more than once in hro consecutive gears under Section 75 of th.e Madras Citg p;lice Aci or und.er Section 3, clause 12, of the Towns Nuisances Act

¶70

(d) persons uho Lubituallg Ease u)omen and girls bg passing indecent remarks or otleruise; and

¶71

(e) in the ase of roudies rcsiding in an area under one police Station but are found^{to be} Jrequentlg^ui-siting the area under one or mire other^police Stations their rowdA sheets can be naintained at all such police Stations;

¶72

(G.O. Ms. No. 656, Home (Poltce-D) Dept. Dt. 8-4-1971)

(2) Itlstructions in Ord,er 735 regarding discontinuance of History^Sheets shall also applg^to Rou.)dv^Sheets."

¶78

In the present case, after opening of^{the Rowdy Sheet against the} petitioner on 25.07.2076, he has involved^{in several crimes.It is stated} that Crime No.345 /2021,^{which was takencognizanceas} C.C.No.410/2022^{is pendingfor trial on the Iile of XI AdditionalChief} Metropolitan Magistrate, at^{Secunderabad.As per the Standing Order} No.742,the police are required^{to review and renewa rowdysheetonce} a year.

¶79

¶80

g. In view of the above^{circumstances, the petitioner is directed to} submit a detailed^{representation on the file of respondent No'3 duly} enclosing the relevant^{material. On filing suchrepresentation,the} respondent No.3is directed^{to take note of the acquittal orders passed in} the criminal cases and^{considerthe representation of the petitioner, in} accordalce with^{Police Manual and pass appropriateorders' Itis} needless to observe that^{if the petitioner involves in any crime in future} and if there is arry sufficient^{materialto estabrlish that his movements} are required tobe^{prevented, the respondent-spolice are at liberty to take} action against him^{strictly in accoidance with the Standing Orders of} A.P. Police Manual.

¶81

lO. With the above^{observations,this Writ ?etition is disposed of' No} costs.

¶82

Misce eous a lications if an n shall stand closed. S ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To 1 ThePrincipalsecretary,HomeDepartrnent,secretariatBuilding'Stateof Telanqana at^Hyderabad. 2 if*^.&ilty C.frilissioner of Polkre'^{No(hZone,Hyderabad' Tetrangana} ta

-I