MOHAMMED FAYAZ, SRI. ALTHAF, SRI. NASIR MUSTHAF AND SRI. ABDUL AZEEZ Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are before this Court seeking that the 5th respondent be directed to delete the name of the petitioners from the rowdy 'C' list maintained in their record against the petitioners. The petitioners contend that they are businessmen and are permanent residents of the addresses shown in the cause title. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they are law abiding citizens, they have been deliberately involved in a criminal case in C.C. No. 2320/2009. On trial, they have been acquitted by the judgment and order dated 24.8.2004. The petitioners were being unnecessarily arrested by the respondents. The petitioners sought to know the reason for the same and they had sought details under the Right to Information Act. The documents at Annexures 'B' to 'E' were produced by the respondents wherein it was intimated to the petitioners that their names have been included in the rowdy 'C' list. The reasons indicated in the order were also disclosed to the petitioners. The petitioners therefore claiming to be aggrieved by such action, are before this Court.

(2.) THE respondents have filed their objection statement. Reference is also made to the case in C.C. No. 2320/2009 which had been proceeded against the petitioners. It is contended that even though there is acquittal in the said case, the Order No. 1059 in the police manual enlists the circumstances under which a person could be included in the rowdy list. Hence, it is contended that involvement or otherwise in a particular criminal case or acquittal thereon would not be a ground but the police are also entitled to monitor the activities of the persons and if it is seen that any one of the circumstances as found in Order No. 1059 is indulged in by any person, the respondents would be entitled to include them in the rowdy sheet. In the instant case, it is stated that the sub Order (e) and (f) of Order No. 1059(2) is relevant for the purpose of instant case where the petitioners have been included in the rowdy list.

(3.) IN the instant case, since on a stray incident, the names of the petitioners have been included in the rowdy list, I am of the opinion that the direction as sought in the petitions is to be granted. However, in the instant case also, it is made clear that it would always be open for the respondents to monitor the activities of the petitioners, if need arises; and if it is found subsequently that the petitioners have been regularly indulging in such incidents, it would also be open for the respondents to take further action in accordance with law. In that view of the matter, the order made by the respondents to include the name of the petitioners in the rowdy sheet is set aside with a direction to delete the names of the petitioners from the rowdy sheet maintained by the Mangalore North Police Station. However, liberty is reserved to the respondents to take action in accordance with law, if need arises in future. These petitions stand disposed of accordingly.