APHC010552852024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3521] MONDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 28878/2024 Between: 1.SHAIK AKHIL, S S/O EESHA AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS. MUSLIM,R/O.D.NO.42-84-18,LENIN CENTRE, SINGH NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA NTR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1.THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2.THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, NTR DISTRICT AT VIJAYAWADA. 3.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, AS NAGAR POLICE STATION, NTR DISTRICT AT VIJAYAWADA. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.Kagita Indu Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: 2 ORDER: The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “… to issue a Writ order or orders more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in summoning/calling the Petitioner to the AS Nagar Police Station and detaining them in illegal custody under the pretext that a rowdy sheet proceeding was pending against them without furnishing the same or any other written proceedings are arbitrary illegal violates the principles of natural justice and against the Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents herein not to summon to the Police Station and detain the Petitioners without furnishing the proceedings if any pending against the Petitioners and pass…” 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. 3. Smt. Kagita Indu, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, contends that the Petitioner has been summoned to the Police Station without any lawful justification and has been illegally detained under the guise of a purported rowdy sheet or suspect sheet said to be pending against him. It is further urged that Respondent Nos.2 and 3 be directed to place on record and furnish copies of the alleged proceedings pertaining to the opening of such suspect sheet, if any. 4. Sri P. Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader, on written instructions, submits that Respondent No.3 had merely required the presence of the Petitioner for the limited purpose of verifying his residential particulars and obtaining his fingerprints. It is asserted that though a criminal case in S.C.No.220 of 2022 had been registered against the Petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(n), 354, 354-D, 324, 506 read with Section 3 34 of ‘the I.P.C.,’ the said case culminated in acquittal, and except for this instance, the Petitioner was never summoned to the Police Station thereafter. 5. It is further submitted that if any history sheet, suspect sheet, or rowdy sheet has indeed been opened against the Petitioner, it is incumbent upon the Petitioner, as a law-abiding citizen, to extend cooperation to Respondent No.3 in furnishing requisite details. The allegations made in the affidavit supporting the Writ Petition stand categorically denied by Respondent No.3. Significantly, the Petitioner has not assailed the validity or legality of any such sheet allegedly pending against him. His limited plea is for the furnishing of a copy of the proceedings, if any, pertaining to the opening of such sheet. In the event any such sheet exists, the Petitioner is undoubtedly entitled to be supplied with its copy, in accordance with law. 6. In that view of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to Respondent No.3 to forthwith furnish to the Petitioner a copy of the history sheet, suspect sheet, or rowdy sheet, if any, opened against him. The Petitioner would thereafter be at liberty to challenge the validity of such proceedings in an appropriate legal forum, if so advised. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed. _________________________ DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J Date: 02.02.2026 VTS