K. Sudhakar, Kurnool v. Prl Secy Home Dept, Hyd And 3 Ot

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V.BHATT W.P.No.29750 OF 2013 ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader (Home) for respondents.

The petitioner prays for the following relief: ".....this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondents in not closing the history sheet opened against the petitioner in the 4th respondent station vide History Sheet No.21, though no case is registered against him as being illegal and arbitrary, and to pass...."

Counsel for petitioner, on instructions from his client, submits that continuation of history sheet against the petitioner is unwarranted, both in law and fact. Even assuming that the petitioner was involved in a criminal case, the same ended in acquittal. The petitioner is a responsible citizen and is prepared to work for social service or social cause to prove the transformation and continuing to be as such.

The counsel, keeping in view the procedure followed by respondents in renewing the history sheet, requests the Court to direct the respondents to consider the representation of petitioner while renewing the subject history sheet. To prove his value to the society and take up social cause, the counsel submits that petitioner volunteers to do social service as may be intimated by the respondents.

The petitioner by stating so has persuaded this Court to direct the respondents to receive representation of petitioner and the respondents consider entrusting social service/ cause to petitioner for undertaking the same.

The petitioner is given liberty to do social service and prove his utility in the locality/ society. As to the representation, this Court in similar circumstances directed the respondents to consider representations on renewing the history sheet/ rowdy sheet. Hence, the respondents are directed to take note of the circumstances as on date while reviewing the history sheet challenged in the writ petition. The petitioner is given liberty to file explanation/ representation within two weeks from today by enclosing copy of this order. This Court has no reason to doubt that as and when such explanation/ representation is filed by the petitioner, the same is examined in the light of the law laid down by this Court in W.P.No.4688 of 2012, which was disposed of on 16.03.2017 and in the judgments reported in SUNKARA SATYANARAYANA V.

STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH1 AND B. SATYANARAYANA REDDY V. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH2. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _____________ S. V. BHATT, J 02nd January, 2018 Lrkm 1 2000(1) ALD (Crl.) 117 (AP) 2 2004(1) ALD (Crl.) 38 = 2004(2) ALT (Crl.) 115