Naser-Bin-Sayeed ,Naser Lahaji v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.4343 of 2019 ORDER:

Heard.

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by opening of a rowdy sheet and continuing the rowdy sheet.

3. Facts on record would disclose that on the ground that petitioner involved in (1) crime No.19 of 2011 of Chandrayanaguta Police station registered for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code (2) crime No.309 of 2015 of Chandrayanagutta Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of Indian Penal Code and (3) crime No.143 of 2016 of Chandrayanagutta Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 506, 384 and 511 of Indian Penal Code, rowdy sheet came to be opened against the petitioner.

4. It is seen from the orders passed by this Court in Crl.M.P.Nos.9962 and 9963 of 2017 in Crl.P.No.9189 of 2017 on 21.09.2017 and Crl.M.P.Nos.6153 and of in Crl.P.No.16080 of 2016 on 17.11.2016, crime Nos.309 of 2015 and 143 of 2016 were compromised and closed whereas crime No.19 of 2011 also ended in compromise before Lok Adalat. Thus, as of now, no crime is pending investigation nor the petitioner is facing any charge before any Court. Therefore, further continuation of the rowdy sheet is not warranted in the facts of this case.

5. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed directing the respondents to close the rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner. However, this order does not come in the way of reviewing opening of rowdy sheet, if the petitioner gets involved in any other crime in future.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending in this writ petition, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ P.NAVEEN RAO, J 12th April, 2019.

sur