APHC010075402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3368] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PETITION No: 4151/2025 Between: 1. AREPALLI RAMAKOTI, S/O VENKATESWARA RAO AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, OCCU DAILY LABOUR, D NO 1-43, SRIKAKULAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 521132 ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRI SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT, AT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KRISHNA DISTRICT. 3. THE SUB DIVISIONAL POLICE OFFICER, AVANIGADDA SUB DIVISION, AVANIGADDA, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ELURU, AT ELURU, ELURU DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, GANTASALA POLICE STATION, KRISHNA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. CH B R P SEKHAR 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.4151/2025 O R D E R: 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 declaring the action of the 3rd respondent in continuing the suspect sheet against the petitioner in C No.345/SDPO.A/2021 dated 27-12-2021 without there being any cases pending against the petitioner and the action of 4th Respondent in summoning/calling the Petitioner frequently to the Ghantasala Police Station and detaining him in the police station for hours together on the pretext that suspect sheet is pending against him, as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice, violation of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to provisions of Police Standing Order No.600-1, and consequently direct the Respondents to close the suspect sheet opened against the petitioner in C N0.345/SDPO.A/202I dated 27-12-2021. 2. Heard Sri Ch.Sekhar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.Farook, learned Additional Government Pleader for Home. 3 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that all the cases which were registered against the petitioner herein are no longer pending and the petitioner got acquitted in all the cases 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. 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 4 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 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 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. 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. 5 9. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the interlocutory applications, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. _______________________ ____ JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI Dated: 25.02.2025. PSK 6 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI 19 WRIT PETITION No:4151 OF 2025 Date: 25.02.2025 W PSK