Point of law: opening of Rowdy Sheet or Suspect Sheet against the petitioner for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and Section 34-A of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 is contrary to the Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual.

ORDER :

M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.

1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

"....to issue order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in opening a 'Suspect Sheet' against the petitioner vide proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020, invoking Standing Order No. 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B", as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass such other order."

2. The 4th respondent herein registered a case against this petitioner vide FIR No. 555/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC, Sections 34(a) and 36(1)(i)(b) and (c) of A.P. Excise Amendment Act, 2019 and this petitioner is arrayed as A7 in the said crime.

3. Basing on the F.I.R., the 3rd respondent passed impugned orders vide proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020 opening a Suspect Sheet against the petitioner invoking the powers conferred under Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B".

4. The basis for opening of said Suspect Sheet is registration of three cases, out of these cases, reference No. 2 and reference No. 3 are petty cases which are pertaining to the years 2014 and 2012 respectively. The petitioner was acquitted in those two cases long back. Reference No. 4 i.e., FIR No. 555/2020 is also a false case and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case allegedly.

5. The 3rd respondent has opened the Rowdy Sheet without looking into the material on record and he has merely acted on the proposal sent by the 4th respondent. Even, the 4th respondent has also not looked into the merits of the case and also not verified about the veracity of the cases and in a routine manner sent the proposal to the 3rd respondent and Suspect Sheet is opened which would infringe the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

6. It is further contended that the registration of above crime do not fall within the ambit of Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B" and therefore the very opening of the Rowdy Sheet against this petitioner, is illegal and arbitrary and requested to set aside the same.

7. Learned Government Pleader for Home filed counter-affidavit denying the material allegations inter alia contending that a case in Cr. No. 1/2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of A.P. Gaming Act and another case in Cr. No. 93/2014 under Section 110(e) Cr.P.C. at Penamalur Police Station of Vijayawada City and finally in the year 2020 a case in Cr. No. 555/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 were registered against this petitioner. In view of the involvement of the petitioner in the above criminal cases, in order to curb and curtail his unlawful activities after obtaining permission from the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central Division, Vijayawada City, Krishna District, a Suspect Sheet has been opened against the petitioner herein vide Proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020 on the file of Penamalur Police Station and the same is being continued and renewed from time to time.

8. The respondents have also extracted the guidelines for opening of Suspect Sheet in Para 4 of the counter-affidavit which will be referred at appropriate stage and they are not required at this stage and finally requested to dismiss the petition.

9. During course of hearing, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner are punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC, Sections 34 and 36(1) (i)(b) and (c) of A.P. Excise Amendment Act, 2019 do not fall within the scope of Standing Orders 600(1) and 600(2) of And