Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 3 (AP)

Madala Srinivasa Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2021-01-05

M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

body2021
ORDER : M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J. 1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: "....to issue order or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in opening a 'Suspect Sheet' against the petitioner vide proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020, invoking Standing Order No. 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B", as illegal, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass such other order." 2. The 4th respondent herein registered a case against this petitioner vide FIR No. 555/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC, Sections 34(a) and 36(1)(i)(b) and (c) of A.P. Excise Amendment Act, 2019 and this petitioner is arrayed as A7 in the said crime. 3. Basing on the F.I.R., the 3rd respondent passed impugned orders vide proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020 opening a Suspect Sheet against the petitioner invoking the powers conferred under Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B". 4. The basis for opening of said Suspect Sheet is registration of three cases, out of these cases, reference No. 2 and reference No. 3 are petty cases which are pertaining to the years 2014 and 2012 respectively. The petitioner was acquitted in those two cases long back. Reference No. 4 i.e., FIR No. 555/2020 is also a false case and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case allegedly. 5. The 3rd respondent has opened the Rowdy Sheet without looking into the material on record and he has merely acted on the proposal sent by the 4th respondent. Even, the 4th respondent has also not looked into the merits of the case and also not verified about the veracity of the cases and in a routine manner sent the proposal to the 3rd respondent and Suspect Sheet is opened which would infringe the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 6. Even, the 4th respondent has also not looked into the merits of the case and also not verified about the veracity of the cases and in a routine manner sent the proposal to the 3rd respondent and Suspect Sheet is opened which would infringe the fundamental right of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 6. It is further contended that the registration of above crime do not fall within the ambit of Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B" and therefore the very opening of the Rowdy Sheet against this petitioner, is illegal and arbitrary and requested to set aside the same. 7. Learned Government Pleader for Home filed counter-affidavit denying the material allegations inter alia contending that a case in Cr. No. 1/2012 for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of A.P. Gaming Act and another case in Cr. No. 93/2014 under Section 110(e) Cr.P.C. at Penamalur Police Station of Vijayawada City and finally in the year 2020 a case in Cr. No. 555/2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 were registered against this petitioner. In view of the involvement of the petitioner in the above criminal cases, in order to curb and curtail his unlawful activities after obtaining permission from the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central Division, Vijayawada City, Krishna District, a Suspect Sheet has been opened against the petitioner herein vide Proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020 on the file of Penamalur Police Station and the same is being continued and renewed from time to time. 8. The respondents have also extracted the guidelines for opening of Suspect Sheet in Para 4 of the counter-affidavit which will be referred at appropriate stage and they are not required at this stage and finally requested to dismiss the petition. 9. 8. The respondents have also extracted the guidelines for opening of Suspect Sheet in Para 4 of the counter-affidavit which will be referred at appropriate stage and they are not required at this stage and finally requested to dismiss the petition. 9. During course of hearing, learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner are punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC, Sections 34 and 36(1) (i)(b) and (c) of A.P. Excise Amendment Act, 2019 do not fall within the scope of Standing Orders 600(1) and 600(2) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B" and thereby the very opening of Suspect Sheet is illegal and arbitrary and infringe the rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and requested to quash the same. 10. Whereas learned Government Pleader for Home made a attempt to support the action taken by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central Division, Vijayawada City, Krishna District, while contending that the petitioner involved in two other crimes long back and therefore the petitioner is involving in various offences and to prevent further involvement of this petitioner and to curtail the illegal acts of the petitioner, a Suspect Sheet is opened and being renewed. 11. Considering the rival contentions and upon perusal of the material on record, the sole point that arose for consideration is that: Whether opening of Suspect Sheet for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of A.P. Gaming Act in Cr. No. 1/2012, under Section 110(e) Cr.P.C. in Cr. No. 93/2014 and under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and 34(a) of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 in Cr. No. 555/2020, is justifiable, if not, liable to be set aside? 12. Point: The proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020 on the file of Penamalur Police Station, Vijayawada City disclosed that the petitioner involved in three crimes viz., in Cr. Novl/2012 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of A.P. Gaming Act, Cr. No. 93/2014 registered for the offence punishable under Section 110(e) "Cr.P.C. at Penamalur Police Station, Vijayawada City and Cr. No. 555/2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and Section 34-A of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 at Penamalur Police Station, Vijayawada City. 13. According to the petitioner, he was found not guilty in Cr. No. 93/2014 registered for the offence punishable under Section 110(e) "Cr.P.C. at Penamalur Police Station, Vijayawada City and Cr. No. 555/2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and Section 34-A of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 at Penamalur Police Station, Vijayawada City. 13. According to the petitioner, he was found not guilty in Cr. No. 93/2014 and the proceedings under Section' 110(e) Cr.P.C., were closed long back. Whereas, he was found not guilty in Cr. No. 1/2012 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of A.P. Gaming Act long back. But, mere involvement of crimes about 6 to 8 years, opening of Suspect Sheet does not arise and even otherwise involvement in Cr. No. 93/2014. Even if, any order is passed by the Executive Magistrate in the proceedings under Section 110(e) of Cr.P.C., based on Cr. No. 93/2014 it will be in force for a period of six months and it is deemed to have been expired if any preventive is order passed under Section 110(e) Cr.P.C. Hence, opening of Suspect Sheet' in the year 2020, on the basis of involvement of this petitioner in Cr. No. 93/2014 and Cr. No. 1/2012 on the file of Penumaka Police Station is a grave illegality committed by the 3rd respondent. 14. Coming to the case in Cr. No. 555/2020 on the file of Penamalur Police Station, Vijayawada City, the offences allegedly committed by this petitioner are punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and Section 34-A of A.P. Excise Act, 1968. The petitioner being a cook in the bar and restaurant in violation of the pandemic Covid-19 guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs started sale of liquor and it is a clear violation of the order imposed by the respondents 3 and 4 and the same is punishable under Section 188 IPC. Though the petitioner is claiming to be a foreigner to the bar and restaurant, even assuming for a moment that this petitioner committed any such offence that would not fall within the ambit of Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B". 15. Though the petitioner is claiming to be a foreigner to the bar and restaurant, even assuming for a moment that this petitioner committed any such offence that would not fall within the ambit of Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B". 15. According to the petitioner and respondents, Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B" permits the police to open 'Rowdy Sheet' or 'Suspect Sheet' only when the petitioner involved in commission of following offences and they are extracted as hereunder: (1) Persons, convicted under any section of the Indian Penal Code, who are considered likely to commit crime again, and (2) Persons, not convicted but believed to be addicted to crime. (3) Members of criminal gangs or organized criminal syndicates who have been charge sheeted. (4) Communal and Caste activists who are known to instigate, organize violence or spark off communal or caste riots. (5) Smugglers, hoarders, black marketers and for professional land grabbers, boot leggers, sand smugglers, persons charged under money laundering Act. (6) Assault on Public Servant. (7) Attempt to murder (307 IPC) Murder (302 IPC). (8) Chain snatching. (9) Extended under City Police Act/other Acts like Anti-Social Hazardous Activities (Prevention) Act. (10) Extended under Anti-Social Activities, Hazardous Activities (Prevention) Act, 1980 and other Acts. (11) Rape cases under Sections 376 IPC, 376-A, C, D, E. (12) Trafficking cases under Sections 370, 370-A, 366-A, 366-B, 372 and 373 IPC including Immoral Traffic Prevention Act sections. (13) Cases of POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Act, 2012. (14) Cases under Sections 354, 354-A to 354-D, 326A and 326B of IPC. (15) Listed accused in Multi-level Marketing cases/While collar crime. (16) Persons charged under unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. 16. But, in the present case, the offences allegedly committed by this petitioner are punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and Section 34-A of A.P. Excise Act, 1968, but they are not covered by Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B" extracted above. 17. Therefore, opening of Rowdy Sheet or Suspect Sheet against the petitioner for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and Section 34-A of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 is contrary to the Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B". 17. Therefore, opening of Rowdy Sheet or Suspect Sheet against the petitioner for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 188 and 269 IPC and Section 34-A of A.P. Excise Act, 1968 is contrary to the Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B". Hence, on this ground alone, the proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020 on the file of Penamalur Police Station, Vijayawada City against this petitioner are liable to be quashed. 18. In view of my foregoing discussion, no further examination is necessary as the very opening of Rowdy/Suspect Sheet or History Sheet is contrary to Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B" and consequently the proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020 on the file of Penamalur Police Station and the same are liable to be set aside. 19. In the result, the writ petition is allowed declaring the proceedings C. No. 155/ACP/CD/2020, dated 8.9.2020 on the file of Penamalur Police Station, Vijayawada City, as illegal, arbitrary, in violation of Standing Order 600(1) of Andhra Pradesh Police Manual, Part-I, Volume-II "B" and consequently set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. 20. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.