- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16797 WP No. 109006 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 109006 OF 2025 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN: SHRI. RAHUL S/O. RAMANATH NAIK, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCCU: DRIVER, R/O: MARATVAD NANDANAGUDDU KARWAR, DIST: UTTARA KANNADA-581320. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATESH M. KHARVI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA R/BY ITS SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, VIDHAN SOUDHA, BENGALURU - 560001. 2. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT, UTTARA KANNADA-581301. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN POLICE STATION, KARWAR-581301. 4. THE TALUKA EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE, KARWAR TALUKA, KARWAR, UTTARA KANNADA-581301. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T. HANUMAREDDY, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO KINDLY ISSUE WRIT ORDER OR DIRECTED TO QUASHED THE ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.2/DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DATED. 12/12/2023 IN REFERENCE NO. SDPO/KARWAR/ROWDY /38/2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A. AND ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4/EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATE DATED. 12/09/2025 IN Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16797 WP No. 109006 of 2025 REFERENCE NO.MAG/107/VVA-87/2025-26 VIDE ANNEXURE-L AND DIRECTED THE RESPONDENTS TO REMOVE NAME OF PETITIONER FROM THE ROWDY SHEET. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) 1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: a. Kindly issue writ order or directed to quashed the endorsement issued by the Respondent No.2/Deputy Superintendent of Police dated 12/12/2023 in reference No.SDPO/KARWAR/ROWDY/38/2023 vide Annexure-A and endorsement issued by the Respondent No.4/executive magistrate dated 12/09/2025 in reference No.MAG/107/VVA- 87/2025-26 vide Annexure-L and directed the respondents to remove name of petitioner from the rowdy sheet. b. Issue any other writ or order which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Heard the learned counsel Sri. Venkatesh M. Kharvi appearing for the petitioner and the learned AGA Sri. T.Hanumareddy appearing for the respondents. 3. The petitioner gets embroiled in a crime in which he is said to have got acquitted of the offences pursuant to an order dated 03.09.2020. On the score that the petitioner was embroiled in the aforesaid crime, the petitioner's name was drawn in the list of rowdies. After the acquittal, the petitioner is - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16797 WP No. 109006 of 2025 said to have submitted a representation seeking removal of his name from the list of rowdies maintained before the third respondent police station. An endorsement comes to be issued rejecting the representation of the petitioner for removal of his name from the list of rowdies. The endorsement is what has driven the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would project several legal grounds in support of his claim for quashment of the endorsement. The endorsement admittedly runs counter to the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case B.S.PRAKASH VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS in W.P.No.4504/2021 disposed on 22.04.2022 and so also in the judgment rendered by the Co-ordinate bench in W.P.No.14560/2022, disposed on 25.08.2022. The guidelines laid down in W.P.No.4504/2021 read as follows: “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 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16797 WP No. 109006 of 2025 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 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 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 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:16797 WP No. 109006 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.” 5. In the light of the said order passed by the Co- ordinate Bench, the respondents will have to reconsider the case of the petitioner in strict consonance with what the Co-ordinate Bench has held in the aforesaid judgment. 6. Owing to the fact that the petitioner has been acquitted of the offences, as is submitted by him, in that light, it may be appropriate to dispose the petition with a direction to the respondent Nos.3 and 4 to reconsider the claim of the petitioner, as a matter of form, within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 7. For such reconsideration, the impugned endorsement stands quashed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE Kmv CT:ANB