IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AKULA VENKATA SESHA SAI, J.
Mohd. Sadiq Shareef – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana and Others – Respondents
W.P. No. 15470 of 2017
Decided On : 03-12-2018
ROWDY SHEET - OPENING AND CONTINUATION - POLICE STANDING ORDER 601 - Opening of Rowdy Sheet against an individual is an action that affects life and liberty, thus strict adherence to relevant provisions is mandatory. Rowdy Sheet cannot be opened in a mechanical, routine, and cavalier manner.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner challenged the opening and continuation of Rowdy Sheet against him, arguing that it was illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, as well as Police Standing Order 601. He contended that there was only one pending murder case against him and no conviction so far.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that opening a Rowdy Sheet against an individual is an action that affects life and liberty, and thus strict adherence to relevant provisions is mandatory. It referred to its earlier judgment in M. Malla Reddy vs. State of Telangana, emphasizing the need for care and caution in opening Rowdy Sheets due to their impact on fundamental rights.
Issues: 1. Whether the opening and continuation of Rowdy Sheet against the petitioner was illegal and arbitrary. 2. Whether the petitioner's involvement in a pending murder case justified the continuation of the Rowdy Sheet.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Police Standing Order 601, which specifies the categories of persons who may be classified as rowdies and against whom Rowdy Sheets may be opened. It noted that the petitioner did not fall under any of these categories and that there was no conviction against him.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to submit a representation to the 2nd respondent within two weeks. The respondent was required to verify the representation and take appropriate action in accordance with the law and the court's observations within four weeks.
ORDER :
1. In the present writ petition, challenge is to the opening and continuation of Rowdy Sheet against the petitioner.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home, appearing for Respondents.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that the questioned action is highly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, besides being opposed to the very spirit and object of the Police Standing Order 601. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that in the absence of necessary ingredients of PSO 601, opening of Rowdy Sheet against the petitioner cannot be sustained. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that so far there is only one crime registered against the petitioner under Sections 120-B, 302 read with 34 of IPC and the same is pending trial. It is the further submission of the learned counsel that there is no _ conviction so far against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner herein is suffering from various ailments and also underwent cardiac surgery.
4. On the contrary, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that there is absolutely no illegality nor there exists any infirmity in the impugned action and in the absence of the same, the petitioner herein is not entitled for any indulgence of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is also the submission of the learned Government Pleader that in view of involvement of the petitioner in a murder case, his activities are required to be watched by continuing the rowdy sheet against him.
5. The opening of Rowdy Sheet against an individual is undoubtedly an action, which affects the life and liberty of an individual. PSO 601 is penal in nature. Therefore, while opening a Rowdy Sheet against an individual, strict adherence to the relevant provisions is mandatory. In this context, it may be appropriate to refer to the judgment of this Court in M. Malla Reddy vs. State of Telangana and Others, 2016 (1) ALD (Crl.) 591. In the said judgment, while dealing with the issue of opening of Rowdy Sheet and the obligation cast upon the police authorities in the said process, this Court at paragraph 10 held as under:
6. In this context, it may also be appropriate to refer to Police Standing Order No. 601 and according to the same, the following persons may be classified as Rowdies and Rowdy Sheet may be opened against them:
601 The following persons may be classified as rowdies and Rowdy Shee
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.