VENKATA SATYANARAYANA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sri B. Adinarayana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was branded as one of the followers of Devineni Rajasekhar, MLA, from Kankipadu Assembly Constituency and at the behest of the rival politicians of the said Rajasekhar, petitioner was implicated in several criminal cases along with the said Rajasekhar. A rowdy sheet was opened against the petitioner in 1992. The petitioner was elected as Corporator from Ward No. 32 of Vijayawada Municipal Corporation in 1995 and taking advantage of false criminal cases lodged against the petitioner, the rowdy sheet was continued. Thereafter the petitioner got reelected as Corporator during 2000-05 and also became the Deputy Mayor of the Corporation. The petitioner was elected again as Corporator in 2005 and is continuing as such. Several criminal cases filed against the petitioner ended in acquittal but the respondents never bothered to review the case of the petitioner to close down the rowdy sheet despite the Police Standing Orders specifically providing the same. The Police Standing Order 742 (PSO 742) provides for opening of rowdy sheet against the persons classified therein under the orders of the Superintendent of Police or the Sub-Divisional Police Officer. He further submits that none of the conditions mentioned in PSO 742 are satisfied for continuance of the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner. The petitioner filed a representation dated 08-04-2006 before the Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada to review his case and discontinue the rowdy sheet, but no action has been taken on the said representation for discontinuance of the rowdy sheet as provided under PSO 735. The petitioner, therefore, submits that continuance of the rowdy sheet opened on 24-11-1992 is illegal, arbitrary, against PSO 742 and unconstitutional and consequently seeks a direction to the respondents to quash the rowdy sheet.

(2.) The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada City, filed a counter stating that the petitioner - Venkata Satyanarayana figured as accused in the following cases:

(3.) The petitioner was acquitted in the above cases either because the witnesses turned hostile or for the reasons mentioned against each of the cases.