M.B. Lakshmikanta Rao, S/O Sham Rao v. The Superintendent Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEEN PRESENT Between:
M.B. Lakshmikanta Rao ... Petitioner Vs.
The Superintendent of Police, Mahboobnagar, Mahboobnagar district & Ors. ... Respondents
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri S.Venkateshwar Reddy Counsel for the Respondents: GP for Home The Court made the following: [order follows] O R D E R :
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the action of respondents in not deleting the name of the petitioner from the rowdy sheet.
2. Heard Sri S.Venkateshwar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for respondents.
3 . According to the petitioner, he is a resident of Medkunda, Ieeja Mandal,
Mahboobnagar district. It is further stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition that the political opponents of the petitioner, who failed to get the votes in the General Elections in 1989 and 1994 with a view to tarnish his image got foisted false and frivolous cases. It is also the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner herein that continuation of the rowdy sheet against the petitioner is highly illegal and opposed to the Police Standing Orders.
4. A counter-affidavit is filed by the fourth respondent - Sub-Inspector of Police, Ieeja Police Station, Mahboobnagar district and paragraph No.4 of the counter affidavit reads as under:
"It is respectfully submitted that in view of the involvement of the petitioner herein in the above criminal cases it has become incumbent on the part of the respondents police to curb and curtail his unlawful activities after obtaining the permission from the SubDivisional Police Officer, Gadwal, Mahboobnagar district on 09/1/1993 the rowdy sheet of the petitioner herein has been opened on the file of Station House Officer, Ieeja Police Station, Mahbubnagar district as per the Standing Orders contained in the A.P. Police Manual and it is extended upto 31/12/2015."
5. During the course of hearing, it is requested by the learned counsel for the petitioner herein to permit the petitioner to submit an application afresh before the respondent - police authorities for deletion of the name of the petitioner from the rowdy sheet and the said request is not opposed by the learned Government Pleader for respondents.
6. In view of the above reasons, the writ petition is disposed of, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, permitting the petitioner herein to submit an application before the respondent - police authorities
requesting for deletion of the name of the petitioner from the rowdy sheet within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any such application is made by the petitioner herein, the same may be considered and appropriate orders be passed within a period of two months thereafter in accordance with law. No costs.
7. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
_____________________ JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI 04/11/2015
I s L
Date: 04/11/2015 Circulation No.
Court Master: I s L