V. BHASKARA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THE questions that arise in this writ petition are when a rowdy-sheet for a citizen under the police manual can be opened and how long it can be continued, and whether such a continuance offends the fundamental rights of the citizen under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case as stated in the writ affidavit in brief are: The petitioner is a resident of H. No. 18-10-40/16, Barkas of Hyderabad city. A rowdy-sheet was opened for him on 12-8-1967 and the same is continued till today in the Chandrayana Gutta police-station. The petitioner claims that he is a law-abiding citizen doing social-work and that he was also given ticket by the Telugu Desam party as a candidate to contest for the elections of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad. He has established a good reputation and the people of the locality repose trust and confidence in him. While matters stood thus the police-authorities sent a notice D / - 15-9-86 to him under the Hyderabad City Police Act of 1345 fasli directing him to report to the police-station, Chandrayana Gutta between 8 and 9 in the morning and between 8 and 9 again in the evening for about one month on the ground that they had information that the petitioner was going to commit some offence. He gave explanation and later the matter was closed.

( 3 ) IT is further stated that he is not involved in any offence or associated himself in any unlawful activities. The police-authorities on some untenable ground included his name in the rowdy-sheet register and opened a rowdy-sheet for him under Standing Order 742 of the A. P. Police Standing Orders and instructed him on frequent occasions to appear in the police-station without stating the cause or reason. They are also making him to sit in the police-station for hours together restricting the right of his movement under the cover of rowdy-sheet. They call on him at odd hours and ask him to report to the police-station immediately and that in his absence his family members were also harassed. It is further stated that opening of a rowdy sheet for a particular individual carries with it the stigma against his character which belittles the image of the individual in the society. The opening of a rowdy sheet gives opportunity to the police authorities to act arbitrarily and abridge the fundamental right of the citizen to move freely. It is not in every case that a person can be classified as a rowdy. It is also stated that none of the conditions contemplated by Standing Order 742 of the A. P. Police Standing Orders are fulfilled in the case of this petitioner to classify him as a rowdy and to open a rowdy-sheet for him. It is further stated that a Police Clearance Certificate D/- 1l-2-1985 was also given to him stating that there is no adverse information against him as a holder of passport No. W 179900. In the circumstances he prayed for a writ of mandamus declaring the rowdy sheet opened to be illegal and unconstitutional and for a consequent direction to remove the petitioner s name from the rowdy -sheet register.

( 4 ) THE respondents have filed a counter stating that the petitioner was doing passport business in Barkas and that he (was) involved (in) a number of cases since 1969. He was in the habit of assaulting innocent people at public places in order to create terror and panic in the minds of public. He also involves in Crime No. 5/377 of Chatrinaka Police-Station under Sec. 25 of the Immigration Act. As such a rowdy sheet was opened for him on 12-3-67 at Chandrayanagutta Police-Station in order to keep a close watch on his activities which are likely to cause breach of public peace and tranquillity and take suitable preventive action. It is stated that the petitioner is one of the persons who is known to be frequently indulging in activities likely to disturb public order and cause damage, alarm and harm to the public. It is stated that the grant of ticket by the Telugu Desam Party has nothing to do

Click Here to Read the rest of this document