THORPUNOORI DHANUNJAYA GOUD Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the action of respondents in opening the rowdy sheet dtd. 8/1/2019 vide Proceedings No.07/Rowdy Sheet/ACP-VPRM/RCK/2018 and continuing the same and calling the petitioner to the police station frequently without there being any authority to them curtailing the petitioner's liberty as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India and to consequently direct the respondents to close the rowdy sheet opened against him.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that due to political rivalry, he was falsely implicated in five crimes viz., (i) FIR.No.44 of 2017 dtd. 17/5/2017 registered for the offences punishable under Ss. 447 and 427 IPC, wherein charge sheet has been filed vide CC.No.1273 of 2017 before the Court of VII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Hayathnagar and the same ultimately ended in acquittal; (ii) FIR.No.147 of 2017 dtd. 24/9/2017 for the offence punishable under Sec. 353 IPC, wherein charge sheet has been filed vide C.C.No.1114 of 2017 before the Court of XXIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayathnagar and the same ended in acquittal; (iii) FIR.No.202 of 2018 dtd. 7/7/2018 for the offences punishable under Ss. 468, 471, 473, 420 IPC wherein charge sheet has been filed vide C.C.No.1151 of 2020 on the file of XXIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Rachakonda, at Hayatnagar and the same is pending for adjudication; (iv) FIR.No.287 of 2018 dtd. 14/9/2018 for the offences punishable under Ss. 188, 290, 143 read with 149 IPC wherein charge sheet has been filed vide C.C.No.337 of 2019 on the file of XXIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Hayathnagar and the same is pending for adjudication; (v) FIR.No.293 of 2018 dtd. 18/9/2018 for the offences punishable under Ss. 323, 504, 506 IPC wherein charge sheet has been filed vide C.C.No.1107 of 2018 on the file of VII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, at Hayathnagar, and the same ended in compromise. It is the further case of the petitioner that basing on the alleged offences, the respondents opened rowdy sheet against him vide Proceedings No.07/Rowdy Sheet/ACP-VPRM/RCK/2018 dtd. 8/1/2019 and subsequently, during the time of elections in 2019, at the instance of local rivalry political persons, again four crimes were registered viz., (i) FIR.No.29 of 2019 dtd. 20/1/2019 for the offences punishable under Ss. 171C, 504, 506 read with 34 IPC (ii) FIR.No.30 of 2019 dtd. 20/1/2019 for the offences punishable under Ss. 171C, 504, 506 read with 34 IPC (iii) FIR.No.49 of 2020 dtd. 9/2/2020 for the offences punishable under Ss. 341, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 IPC and (vi) FIR.No.58 of 2020 dtd. 20/2/2020 for the offences punishable under Ss. 420, 324, 352, 342, 409, 506 of IPC and 156(3) of Cr.P.C wherein charge sheets have been filed vide STC.No.12 of 2029, STC.No.13 of 2019, CC.No.564 of 2020 and C.C.No.121 of 2021 respectively before the concerned Courts and the same are pending for adjudication. The main grievance of the petitioner is that even though he submitted a detailed representation dtd. 3/2/2020 to the respondents to close the rowdy sheet, the respondents with a mala fide intention are continuing the rowdy sheet and due to surveillance, he is facing much inconvenience and hardship to lead a respectable and dignified life in the society.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by respondent No.4 inter alia stating that the petitioner is of unlawful character and continuously indulging the commission of lawless acts involving breach of public peace and tranquility. It is further stated that as per the available records, initially five crimes were registered against the petitioner on the file of the Abdullapurmet Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate and taking into consideration his involvement in those criminal cases, as per the proceedings issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Vanasthalipuram Division, Rachakonda, vide proceedings No.07/Rowdy Sheet/ACP-VPRM/RCK/2018 dtd. 8/1/2019, rowdy sheet was opened against the petitioner. Even after opening of the rowdy sheet, the petitioner is again involved in four criminal cases. Thus, in view of his involvement in various criminal cases, even though the petitioner has submitted representation to close the rowdy sheet, it has become incumbent on the part of the respondents to continue the rowdy sheet.