/5 V! ..V IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARPA TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVART>II WRIT PETITION NO: 12506 OF 2024- Between: Geddati Bala Bhaskara Rao @ Balaiah, S/o. Babu Rao, Aged about 39 years, R/o. D. No. 5-11-5, Pilli Devid Street, Ithanagar, Tenali Town, Guntur District ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Guntur, Guntur District. 3. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Tenali, Tenali town, Guntur District. 4. The Station House Officer, 11 Town Police Station, Tenali, Tenali town, Guntur District. 5. The Station House Officer, Duggirala Police Station, Duggirala Guntur District. 6. The Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada, Krishna District. ...RESPONDENTS - Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents particularly respondent Nos.2 to 5 in opening the impugned Rowdy Sheet m pursuant to the proceedings/ orders of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Tenali bearing C.No.8/SDPO-TNL/2016, dated 21.03.2016 may in the more and continuing r the same from more than 8 years against thu petitioner on the file of the 4*^ respondent police station as highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional consequently quash the same in the interest of justice by directing the Respondents not to interfere with my life and liberty in any manner. - and i «• lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to insist the petitioner to before the 4*^ respondent without any prior notice or not to visit the house of the petitioner, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. - appear Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SARANU PHANI TEJA — Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6: GP FOR HOME ' The Court made the following: ORDER w APHC010248382024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE [3368] PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No: 12506/2024 Between: 1.GEDDATI BALA BHASKARA RAO @ BALAIAH, S/O. BABU RAO, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/0. D. NO. 5-11-5, PILLI DEVID STREET, ITHANAGAR, TENALI TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, 1.THE STATE OF AP, SECRETARY AMARAVATh’i, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, GUNTUR, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3.THE SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, TENALI, TENALI TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 4.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, II TOWN POLICE STATION, TENALI, TENALI TOWN, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 5.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, DUGGIRALA POLICE STATION, DUGGIRALA, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 6.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MACHAVARAM POLICE STATION, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): f 2 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.SARANU PHANITEJA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME (AP) The Court made the following; 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No.12506/2024 ORDER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondents more particularly respondent Nos.2 to 5 in opening the impugned Rowdy Sheet in pursuant to the proceedings/ orders of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Tenali bearing C.No.8/SDPO-TNL/2016, dated 21.03.2016 and continuing the same from more than 8 years against the petitioner on the file of the 4TH respondent police station as highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently quash the same in the interest of justice by directing the respondents not to interfere with my life and liberty in any manner. 2. Heard Sri S.Phani Teja, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.Farook, learned Additional Government Pleader for Home. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that ail the cases which were registered against the petitioner herein are no longer pending and tbe petitioner got acquitted in ail the cases 4 and therefore, continuation of the rowdy sheet against the petitioner is not in accordance with the Police Standing Order No.601. 4. Learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that the petitioner was involved in certain offences earlier. Though the cases are no longer pending against the petitioner at present, there is a chance that the petitioner may repeat the offences and likely to indulge in violence. 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 5. 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 contemplates that rowdy sheets may be opened against the persons, who habitually commit, attempt to commit, or abet the 5 9^. 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. 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 they abetted the commission of offences involving breach of peace nor were they responsible for causing disturbances 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. 7. 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 8. order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no 9. order as to costs. 6 As a sequel thereto, the interlocutory applications, if pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. any, Sd/- M.RAMESH BABU DEPUTY REGISTRAR li //TRUE COPY// SC' SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Amaravathi, Guntur District. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Guntur, Guntur District. 3. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Tenali, Tenali town, Guntur District. 4. The Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Tenali, Tenali tow/( Guntur District. 5. The Station House Officer, Duggirala Police Station, Duggirala Gun^r District. 6. The Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station Krishna District. 7. One CC to Sri Saranu Phani Teja, Advocate [OPUC] ^ 8. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. Three CD Copies. Vijayawa^ ssb f . . ( HIGH COURT DATED:24/02/2025 ORDER WP.No.12506 of 2024 te 0 2 APR 2025 | Current Section Ca ALLOWING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS