APHC010186772019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No: 8040/2019 Between: 1. NANDYALA RAVI,, S/O. NANDYALA SIVUDU, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC- PRIVATE EMPLOYEE, R/O. DOOR NO.4/6, G.IJPPALAPADU, MYLAVARAM MANDAL, Y.S.R DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, Y.S.R DISTRICT, KADAPA. 3. THE SUBDIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, JAMMALAMADUGU, Y.S.R DISTRICT, 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, JAMMALAMADUGU RURAL, JAMMALAMADUGU, Y.S.R DISTRICT. 5. THE SUBINSPECTOR INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TALAMANCHIPATRTAM POLICE STATION, TALAMANCHIPAI.NAM, MYALAVARAM MANDAL, Y.S.R DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. V R REDDY KOVVURI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No: 8040/2019 O R D E R: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus the action of the respondents No.3 to 5 in opening and continuing Rowdy Sheet No.106 of 2017 against the petitioner in Talamanchipatnam Police Station, Talamanchipatnam, Myalavaram Mandal, Y.S.R District, as illegal, colorable exercise of power, contrary to the settled principles of legal position and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents No.2 to 5 to close the Rowdy Sheet No.106 of 2017 against the petitioner in Talamanchipatnam Police Station, Talamanchipatnam, Myalavaram Mandal, Y.S.R District. 2. Heard Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that all the cases which were registered against the petitioner herein are no 3 longer pending and the petitioner got acquitted in all the cases and therefore, continuation of the Rowdy Sheet against the petitioner is not sustainable in law, and also not in accordance with the Police Standing Order No.601. 4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on written instructions would submit that at present no cases are pending against the petitioner. He would further submit that though the said cases were ended in acquittal, there is a chance that the petitioner may repeat the offences and likely to indulge in violence. 5. Admittedly, the impugned Rowdy Sheet was opened against the petitioner earlier with certain alleged offences. Even as per the counter affidavit, no other case is pending against the petitioner herein as on today. It is not the case of the respondents/police that the petitioner has been shown as accused in any other case or he was directed to bind over under Section 107 Cr.P.C. 6. Going by the Police Standing Order No.601, the petitioner would not come within the purview of any of the clauses mentioned therein. Clause 1 of the Police Standing Order No.601 4 contemplates that Rowdy Sheets may be opened against the persons, who habitually commit, attempt to commit, or abet the commission of offences involving a breach of the peace, disturbances to public order, and security. In the present case on hand, except the above mentioned cases registered against the petitioner herein, there are no other cases pending against him. 7. By virtue of the same, it can safely be inferred that the petitioner herein would not come within the purview of habitual offender. Neither had he abetted the commission of offence involving breach of peace, nor was he responsible for causing disturbance to public order or security. When such is the case, continuation of Rowdy Sheet against the petitioner herein would amount to abuse of process of the Court. 8. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is allowed, directing the respondents/police to take necessary action forthwith, for closure of the Rowdy Sheet opened against the petitioner herein, soon after receipt of copy of the order. 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. 5 As a sequel thereto, the interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. _______________________ ____ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI Dated: 19.09.2025. PSK 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI 04 WRIT PETITION No: 8040 OF 2019 Date: 19.09.2025 W PSK