- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1224 WP No. 100402 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 100402 OF 2025 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. ARUN S/O. SHIVAJI ATTARWALE, AGE. 22 YEARS, OCC. R/O. RENUKA NAGAR, BAIRIDEVARAKOPPA, DISTRICT. DHARWAD- HUBLI- 580020. 2. PRASHANTH S/O SHIVAJI ATTARWALE, AGE. 25 YEARS, OCC. R/O. RENUKA NAGAR, BAIRIDEVARAKOPPA, DISTRICT. DHARWAD-HUBLI- 580020. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. RUKMINI M. PATIL, AND SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, HUBBALLI, DISTRICT. DHARWAD- 580020. 2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE HUBBALLI, DISTRICT. DHARWAD- 580020. 3. THE POLICE INSPECTOR, APMC NAVANAGAR POLICE STATION, DISTRICT. HUBLI-DHARWAD- 580020. 4. THE POLICE SUB INSPECTOR, APMC NAVANAGAR POLICE STATION, DISTRICT. HUBLI-DHARWAD -580020. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA) Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1224 WP No. 100402 of 2025 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO, ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS DIRECTING THE RESPONDENTS TO FURNISH THE COPY OF THE IMPUGNED ENDORSEMENT IF ANY AS PER ANNEXURE-D AND E, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS WHERE RESPONDENTS NOT TO CALL UPON THE PETITIONERS TO EXECUTE THE BOND AND UNNECESSARY CALL THE PETITIONERS TO THE POLICE STATION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. Heard the learned counsel Smt.Rukmini M.Patil. 2. The petitioners are before this Court seeking a direction by issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing furnishing of the reasons and documents based upon which the name of the petitioners has been drawn into the list of rowdies maintained before APMC, Navanagar Police Station. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners taking this Court through the documents appended in the petition, would seek to demonstrate that without any rhyme or reason, the name of petitioners is drawn into the list of rowdies maintained by the 4th respondent-police - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1224 WP No. 100402 of 2025 station. It is in violation of the law laid down by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of B S Prakash Vs. the State of Karnataka, W.P.No.4504/2021, which is disposed on 22.04.2022, wherein the Coordinate Bench of this Court has laid down the following guidelines for drawal and removal of the name of citizens in the list of rowdies: GUIDELINES FOR ROWDY/HISTORY SHEETING: i. Before entering the name of an individual to the Register of Rowdies, the jurisdictional police shall collect and collate the material information concerning him and frame the proposal for registration on that basis. ii. A brief proposal notice shall be sent to the individual concerned in a sealed cover with an option to submit his representation within two weeks as to why his name should not be registered as a rowdy. However, there is no need to afford a personal hearing. In exceptional cases notice may be dispensed with for reasons to be recorded in the Register of Rowdies. iii. In terms of Clause (5), Order 1059 of the Manual, the Superintendent of Police or the Sub – Divisional Police Officer shall not accord approval for entering the name of individual concerned to the Register of Rowdies - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1224 WP No. 100402 of 2025 without calling for records and objectively considering the same. He shall briefly record his reasons for according the approval and mark a copy thereof to the individual forthwith, with a mention that he may petition the Police Complaints Authority, against the same. iv. The jurisdictional Police shall compulsorily once in two years, undertake a periodic review of entries in the Register of Rowdies suo motu, as provided under Clause (2), Order 1057 of the Manual. However, it is open to the aggrieved, to make a representation at any time after one year of registration, seeking deletion of name from the Rowdy Register on the basis of changed circumstances such as rectitude, good conduct, social/community service, etc. v. The representation for review shall be considered by the jurisdictional Police at the initial level within a period of 30 days, during which necessary inputs may be obtained through the available sources as to merits of the claim. The recommendation shall be sent to the jurisdictional Superintendent of Police or the Sub – Divisional Police Officer, within 15 days along with the representation & the material collected thereon. Such recommendation along with the result of consideration of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1224 WP No. 100402 of 2025 representation shall be communicated to the individual concerned within next 15 days. vi. Any individual aggrieved by the rejection of his representation or continuation of his name in the Register may petition to the Police Complaints Authority ordinarily within 30 days. However, no personal hearing shall avail. The petition shall be disposed off by recording reasons within an outer limit of 60 days, after considering the material on record or the fresh inputs that may be requisitioned, by the authority. vii. The entire process of Rowdy/History Sheeting from the stage of issuance of proposal notice as specified above, up to the issuance of the orders on the petition if any to the Police Complaints Authority, shall be done only in a sealed cover procedure and that nothing therein shall be disclosed nor made available to anyone, except to the aggrieved, nor any Right To Information (RTI) application shall be entertained in this regard. viii. The violation of these guidelines shall constitute a major misconduct and an adverse entry on proof thereof shall be made by the Disciplinary Authority in the Service Register of the erring official after hearing him and a copy thereof shall be marked to the victim of - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1224 WP No. 100402 of 2025 Rowdy Register/History Sheet, without brooking any delay. ix. Whatever guidelines herein above laid down shall be applicable to the case of History Sheeters as well, mutatis mutandis and subject to the provisions of Karnataka Police Manual, 1965. 4. Learned AGA would submit that if reasonable time is granted, the reason for drawing the name of the petitioners in the list of rowdies would be furnished to the petitioners. 5. In the light of the said submission, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition with a direction to respondents to divulge the information to the petitioners as to why the petitioners are drawn into the list of rowdies. The information will be furnished within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order, if not earlier. 6. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE KGK / List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63