Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1293 (KAR)

SURESH S/O NAGAIAH NAIDU v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

2017-09-14

A.S.BOPANNA

body2017
ORDER : The petitioner is before this Court seeking issue of mandamus to delete the name of the petitioner from the rowdy sheet maintained by the respondent No.3 Police Station. 2. The petitioner contends that he has not involved in any criminal activities and belongs to a respectable family. Though, a case had been registered against the petitioner, the petitioner had stood trial in S.C.No.1149/2013 and has been acquitted through the judgment dated 29.10.2014. The petitioner contends that, apart from the said case, there is no other case registered against the petitioner nor has he indulged in such activity, so as to include his name in the rowdy register. It is in that light, the petitioner is before this Court seeking that his name be deleted from the rowdy sheet. 3. Having taken note of the contentions, what is also to be kept in view is that while including the name of a person in the rowdy register, what is also to be kept in view is the activities as has been enumerated in Standing Order No.1059 of the Karnataka Police Manual. Therefore, when the Competent Authority takes a decision to include a name of the person in the rowdy register, all these aspects of the matter is to be kept in view and a decision is to be taken in that regard. However, if it is found that the petitioner is not involved in any criminal activities, except for the case as referred above, there would be no justification to continue the name of the petitioner in the rowdy register. 4. Hence, to enable a consideration to be made in this regard, the petitioner shall now file a representation with respondent No.2, who shall thereupon secure the records from respondent No.3, verify the same and take a decision in the manner as indicated above and the result of such consideration be conveyed to the petitioner. The decision in any event shall be taken by respondent No.2 as expeditiously as possible but, not later than six weeks from the date on which such representation is made to respondent No.2. In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of.