SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 15510

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
E.V. Venugopal, J
Hritik Yadav – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner of Police – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.16770 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners:Counsel for the Petitioner
For the Respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Home

Maintaining a rowdy sheet against an individual who has no pending criminal cases and does not meet the criteria of a habitual offender (involved in more than two cases) is illegal and perverse.

Headnote:(A) Police Procedure - Rowdy Sheets - Criteria for classification - Persons must habitually commit offences involving breach of peace or be convicted multiple times to be classified as rowdies under the Police Manual. (Para 6, 8)

(B) Habitual Offender - Definition - A person is considered a habitual offender if they are involved in more than two criminal cases. (Para 9)

(C) Fundamental Rights - Maintenance of Rowdy Sheet - Continuing a rowdy sheet when no criminal case is pending and the person does not meet the criteria of a habitual offender is illegal and perverse. (Para 10)

Issues: Whether the maintenance of a rowdy sheet against the petitioner is legal after he was discharged in the only pending criminal case.

Table of Content
1. petitioner challenges rowdy sheet after discharge in criminal case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. police justify rowdy sheet for public peace and order. (Para 4 , 5)
3. legal criteria for opening and maintaining rowdy sheets. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. definition of habitual offender as involvement in two or more cases. (Para 9)
5. court orders closure of rowdy sheet due to lack of pending cases. (Para 10 , 11)

ORDER:

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondents in opening a rowdy sheet against the petitioner.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for official respondents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly a crime was registered against the petitioner vide Crime No.100/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 25(1)(a) of Arms Act on the file of Shahinaythgunj Police Station (Goshamahal). The petitioner was arrayed as accused No.7 in the said crime. Subsequently, charge sheet was filed and the same was numbered as S.C.No.592 of 2022 on the file of learned IV Additional Sessions Judge. The said case was ended in discharge by this Court vide Crl.R.C.No.650/2024 on 26.07.2024. However, the rowdy sheet, which was opened against the petitioner by respondent No.4 in the year 2022, was still continuing and on the point of jurisdiction, it was transferred to P.S. Afzalgunj. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for official respondents, on instructions of Sub-Inspector of Police, Goshamahal Police Station, Hyderabad, would submit that the petitioner was involved in Crime No.100/2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 25(1)(a) of Arms Act. It is further submitted that pursuant to the proposals submitted by respondent No.4, the Assistant Commissioner of Police has accorded permission to open rowdy sheet against the petitioner and accordingly rowdy sheet was opened. On the point of jurisdiction, the said rowdy sheet was transferred to Afzalgunj Police Station, Hyderabad and the same is being maintained by respondent No.3. Further, on instructions of Sub-Inspector of Police, Afzalgunj Police Station, he would submit that the rowdy sheet is being maintained by respondent No.3 by conducting periodical reviews and it stands renewed up to 31.12.2025. It is further submitted that the Director General of Police, Telangana issued Circular vide No.2172/C13/SCRB/CID/TS/22, dated 22.07.2022 to follow due procedure in opening and continuing / renewing the rowdy / suspect / history sheets and the concerned police are following the procedure as per AP Police Manual Orders 599 to 602 as well the aforesaid circular. It is further submitted that except watching the movements of the petitioner, the respondent No.3 is not calling the petitioner and not infringing his fundamental rights.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home further submits that though the petitioner has admittedly been discharged by this Court vide its common order dated 26.07.2024 in Crl.R.C.No.649 & 650 of 2024, in which the petitioner was involved in Crl.R.C.No.650 of 2024, but in order to maintain public peace, tranquility and law and order and taking into consideration of the criminal history of the petitioner, the rowdy sheet has been maintained on the file of respondent No.3. No coercive steps have been taken by the official respondents against the petitioner in respect of the rowdy sheet being maintained on the file of respondent No.3. As such, he prays this Court to dismiss this writ petition.

6. Maintenance of rowdy sheets is governed by Standing Order No.601 of A.P. Police Manual, Part-I, Volume II, which reads as under:

“601. The following persons may be classified as rowdies and Rowdy Sheets (Form 80) may be opened for them under the orders of the SP/DCP and ACP/SD

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top