IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. VEERAPPA WRIT PETITION Nos.23967-23970/2017(GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:
1 . SRI B. A. BASAVARAJU, S/O G. HALAPPA AGED 45 YEARS R/AT KENKERE, HULIYARU HOBLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLY TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572218 2 . H. C. CHIDANANDAMURTHY S/O CAHNNABASAVAIAH AGED 37 YEARS R/AT KENKERE MAJARE HONNAYYANAPALYA HULIYURU HOBLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLY TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-577218 3 . B. P. OMKARAMURTHY S/O PARAMESHWRAIAH AGED 45 YEARS R/AT KENKERE MAJARE BARADALEPALYA, HULIYURU HOBLI, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLY TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-577218 4 . H. M RAGHU S/O MARULAPPA AGED 35 YEARS R/AT KENKERE MAJARE HONNAYYANAPALYA HULIYURU HOBLI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLY TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT-577218 ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI N. S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT M. S. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001 2 . THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE TUMAKURU DISTRICT TUMAKURU-572 103 3 . THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE TIPATUR SUB DIVISION TIPTUR -572202 TUMAKURU DISTRICT 4 . THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLY CIRCLE TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572202 5 . THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE HULIYAR POLICE STATION CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI CIRCLE P.S TUMAKURU DSITRICT-572202 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI M. VINODKUMAR, AGA) **** THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENDORSEMENTS DATED 20.03.2017 AT ANNEXURE-Q, R, S & T AND DIRECT R-2 TO REMOVE THE NAME OF THE PETITIONERS IN THE ROWDY SHEET FORTHWITH ETC., THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-
O R D E R The petitioners have filed the present writ petitions for a writ of certiorari to quash the Endorsements dated 20.3.2017 bearing reference No.H/HH/Petsy/05/2017 as per Annexures – Q, R, S & T issued by the jurisdictional Police and a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent – Superintendent of Police to remove the names of the petitioners in the rowdy sheet.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are agriculturists having permanent residence at Chikkanayakanahally, Tumakuru district. The PSI by name Praveen Kumar of Huliyar Police Station started imputing the petitioners with false criminal cases in view of their refusal to pay him ransom. Initially a false case was registered under the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and thereafter, the harassment continued by registering cases under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is further contended that there are no criminal antecedents against the petitioners and they never involved in criminal activities which attract opening of rowdy sheet as contemplated under the provisions of Order-1059 of the Karnataka Police Manual. Inspite of the same, the Police have included the names of the petitioners in the rowdy sheet. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court for the relief sought for.
3. The State Government filed objections and sought to justify the impugned Endorsements issued by the jurisdictional Police and contended that against the 1st petitioner, Crime Nos.86/1992 and 10/1993 were registered and the same were ended in acquittal and further against 1st, 2nd and 3rd petitioners, Crime No.69/2015 was registered for the offence punishable under the provisions of Section 3(1)(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and Sections 324, 504, 506, 384 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and the same is pending before the Tiptur Sessions Court and also there were other crimes pending against petitioner Nos.1 to 4 for the offence under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure etc.,. It is contended that petitioners are involved in many criminal cases mentioned above and since they have indulged in criminal activities, to supervise them as per the orders of the 3rd respondent, Rowdy Sheets have been opened in Huliyar Police Station. It is also stated in the statement of objections that the Police who have visited the villages have collected the information that the petitioners are threatening the innocent and poor people for their benefits. Therefore, sought to dismiss the writ petitions.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, it is the case of the petitioners that they are agriculturists having permanent residence at Chikkanayakanahally, Tumakuru district and inspite of there being no criminal antecedents against them, their names were included in the rowdy list. When the petitioners approached the jurisdictional Police, the Police issued Endorsements as per Annexures – Q, R, S & T dated 20.3.2017 that there are cases pending under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against them and merely because they have approached the higher authorities, it is not possible to remove their names from the rowdy sheet. Though a specific contention was raised by the learned AGA for the State that the petitioners are involved in criminal cases for the offence punishable under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the fact remains that the rowdy sheet was opened in 2015 and as stated in the statement of objections, the 1st petitioner was already acquitted in two criminal cases and other cases are pending consideration in respect of the petitioners. Learned AGA rightly submitted that proceedings initiated under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Code continue only for a period of one year. In the circumstances, it is for the petitioners to approach the competent authority i.e., the 2nd respondent by way of representation giving details as to how they are not involved in any activities which attracts Order – 1059 of the Karnataka Police Manual and the 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders in accordance with law.
For the reasons stated above, the writ petitions are allowed. The impugned Endorsements issued by the 2nd respondent dated 20.3.2017 as per Annexures – Q, R, S and T are hereby quashed. The petitioners are permitted to file detailed representation before the 2nd respondent for removal of their names from the Rowdy Sheet. If such representation is made, the 2nd respondent shall consider the representation and take appropriate action for removal of their names from the Rowdy Sheet, if they are not involved in any of the activities which attracts Order – 1059 of the Karnataka Police Manual and pass orders in accordance with law.
Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Gss/-