IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.10556 OF 2020 DATE: 26.03.2026 Between:

Y.Uday Basker Goud …Petitioner AND The State of Telangana and Others …Respondents

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief: “…to issue an appropriate direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not closing the rowdy sheets opened against the petitioner vide Proceedings No. 1826/ACP- MK/RCK/2018 dt.22.12.2018 by the 3rd respondent as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, discriminatory and contrary to the procedure laid down under Police Standing Orders and in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently quash the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner vide Proceedings No.1826/ACP-MK/RCK/2018 dt.22.12.2018by the 3rd respondent and pass....”

2. Heard Mr. Venkataramanaiah.K, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent police authorities have opened a rowdy sheet against the petitioner vide proceedings No.1826/ACP-MK/RCK/2018 dated 22.12.2018, without any lawful basis or justifiable reason. It is contended that, under the guise of maintaining a rowdy sheet and subjecting the petitioner to surveillance, the authorities are arbitrarily interfering with his personal life and liberty, thereby infringing his fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the petitioner seeks quashment of the impugned proceedings.

4.1. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that the petitioner was involved in two criminal cases, one registered in the year 2018 and the other in 2025. It is further submitted that Crime No.900 of 2018 has culminated into Sessions Case No.484 of 2022, pending on the file of the learned I Additional District Judge, Malkajgiri, for offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 148, 149, 212, 109, and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, along with Section 25(B)(1)(b) of the Indian Arms Act. The second case, i.e., Crime No.200 of 2025, has been registered for offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and is presently under investigation.

4.2. It is the contention of the learned Assistant Government Pleader that, in view of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and the apprehension that he may cause a breach of peace and disturb public order, the respondent police authorities have been periodically renewing the rowdy sheet based on orders passed by the competent authority. It is asserted that such action is in strict compliance with due process of law and is necessitated to maintain law and order. Therefore, it is contended that the allegation of unlawful interference with the petitioner’s life and liberty is unfounded, and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have perused the material available on record and considered the rival submissions.

6. From the pleadings, it is evident that the rowdy sheet was initially opened against the petitioner in the year 2018 on account of his involvement in a grave offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the record does not disclose any material indicating continuous or habitual involvement of the petitioner in criminal activities affecting public peace and tranquility during the intervening period up to the registration of Crime No.200 of 2025 under Sections 406 and 420 IPC.

7. Standing Order 601 of the (Andhra Pradesh) Telangana Police Manual empowers the police authorities to open and continue a rowdy sheet against individuals whose activities are prejudicial to public order or who habitually engage in offences. However, such power is not unfettered. The continuation of a rowdy sheet is subject to periodic review by the competent a