Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Vallabhaneni Ramesh vs The State Of Ap on 17 March, 2026
APHC010029402026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3521]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 1950/2026
Between:
VALLABHANENI RAMESH, S/OSEETHARAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48
YEARS, RIO D.NO. 18-20, DINTMERAKA, KODURU,KRISHNA
DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI.-522237
2.
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA
DISTRICT.-521001 3.
3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, REPALLE, KRISHNA
DISTRICT.-521001 4.
4. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, REPALLE POLICE STATION,
KRISHNA DISTRICT.-522265 5.
5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ADAVULADEEVI,GUNTUR
DISTRICT.522262
...RESPONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
ABDUL MATHEEN S
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
2
Dr. YLR, J
W.P.No.1950 of 2026
Dated 17.03.2026
GP FOR HOME
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India seeking the following relief:-
“…to issue an appropriate writ order or direction preferably in the
nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent
police in opening and continuing the Rowdy Sheet No 54/A opened
against the petitioner as illegal arbitrary unjust colourable exercise of
power and in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and
consequently direct the Respondents to close the said Rowdy Sheet
No 54/A from Adavuladeevi Police Station Guntur district in the
interest of the justice and to pass….”
2. Mr. Abdul Matheen.S, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits
that five cases were registered against the petitioner and that, at present,
all the said cases have ended in acquittal, and no cases are pending
against him. In spite of the said fact, the continuation of the rowdy sheet is
arbitrary, illegal, and unsustainable. It is further submitted that the rowdy
sheet was opened against the petitioner on 10.01.2005 after obtaining
permission from the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Repalle Sub Division.
From 2005 onwards, pursuant to the opening of the rowdy sheet, no case
has resulted in conviction against the petitioner, and therefore, the learned
counsel urged that the petition be allowed.
3. Sri P. Ajay Babu, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits
that altogether five cases were registered against the petitioner for various
offences and urged to dismiss the petition. In the counter filed by
3
Dr. YLR, J
W.P.No.1950 of 2026
Dated 17.03.2026
respondent No.3, it is stated that Rowdy Sheet No. 54/A was opened
against the petitioner by respondent No. 4 pursuant to the directions issued
by respondent No.3 on 10.01.2005, vide proceedings in Order Nos.733(1)
and 1002(3), and that the rowdy sheet is being revised from time to time
and is continuing on the file of Adavuladeevi Police Station.
4. It is mentioned that the following cases were registered against the
petitioner.
1. Crime No.184/2020, under Sections 323, 34, 341, 508, and 509 of
‘the IPC‘ of Koduru Police Station. In the said case, both parties
compromised before the Lok Adalat on 07.11.2020.
2. Crime No.191/2021, under Sections 188 and 269 of ‘the IPC‘ and
Section 3 of the ESA of Koduru Police Station. The said case ended
in conviction vide C.C. No.517/2021 on the file of the learned Junior
Civil Judge-cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Avanigadda, on
03.11.2021.
3. Crime No.52/2002, under Section 5 of the Essential Services Act (ES
Act) of Adavuladeevi Police Station. The said case ended in acquittal
on 01.11.2004.
4. Crime No.24/2005, under Sections 341 and 506 read with 34 of ‘the
IPC‘ of Adavuladeevi Police Station. In the said case, both parties
compromised on 13.02.2007.
5. Crime No.2/2005, under Section 324 read with 34 of ‘the IPC‘ of
Chowdayapalem Police Station. The said case ended in acquittal.
5. As per Standing Order No.601 of the Andhra Pradesh Police Manual,
the following persons may be classified as rowdies and Rowdy Sheet may
be opened for them under Orders of the Superintendent of Police and Sub
Divisional Police Officer.
4
Dr. YLR, J
W.P.No.1950 of 2026
Dated 17.03.2026
i. Persons, who habitually commit, attempt to commit or abet the
commission of offences involving a breach of the peace, disturbances
to public order and security.
ii. Persons bound over under sections 106, 107, 108(1) and 110(e)
and (g) of Cr.P.C.
iii. Persons who have been convicted more than once in two
consecutive years under sections 59 and 70 of the Hyderabad city
police Act or under section 3. clause 12 of the AP Town Nuisances
Act.
iv. Persons who habitually tease women and girls and pass indecent
remarks including offences U/sec. 354-A, B C and 354D IPC.
V. Persons who have been charge sheeted under the offence of
Rape (376, 376, A,C D.E).
vi. Persons who have been charge sheeted under the offences of
POCSO Act, 2012 and Acid Attacks (326A and 326B of IPC)
vii. Rowdy sheets for the rowdies residing one police station area but
found frequenting the other Police Stations area, can be maintained
at all such police stations.
viii. Persons who intimidate by threats or use of physical violence or
other unlawful means to part with movable or immovable properties or
in the habit of collecting money by extortion from shopkeepers,
traders and other residents including “loan sharks”.
ix. Persons who incite, instigate and participate in communal/caste or
political riots.
x. Persons detained under the AP prevention of Dangerous Activities
of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic
Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 for a period of 6 months or
more.
xi. Persons on whom charge sheets filed under the offence of assault
on public servants, under Arms Act and such other offences
punishable with imprisonment of 2 years or more.
xii Persons on who charge sheets filed under the offence of murder
and attempt to murder (302 and 307 IPC)
xiii. Persons on whom charge sheets filed under the offence of chain
snatching.
xiv. Persons who are convicted under the Representation of People
Act, 1951for rigging, carrying away, damaging ballot paper, boxes
and polling material.
5
Dr. YLR, J
W.P.No.1950 of 2026
Dated 17.03.2026
6. On careful perusal of the Standing Orders, the respondent cannot
open or continue a rowdy sheet/suspect sheet against the petitioner,
inasmuch as the petitioner does not fall within any of the conditions
enumerated in the said Standing Orders. The petitioner has not committed
any offence mentioned therein. Out of the five cases, one case was ended
in compromise before the Lok Adalat, one case was ended in conviction for
the offences under Sections 188 and 269 of ‘the IPC‘, and the remaining
three cases were ended in acquittal. The case of the petitioner does not fall
within any of the conditions enumerated under Standing Order No.601 of
the Andhra Pradesh Police Manual. Therefore, there is no justification to
continue the rowdy sheet even after the acquittal of the petitioner.
7. In pari materia, this Court in Tadiboyina Peraiah @ Mahesh v.
State of A.P1 held that when no crimes are pending against a person and
no material is produced to demonstrate threat to public peace, continuation
of a rowdy sheet under Standing Order No. 601 of the A.P. Police Standing
Orders is impermissible.
8. Similarly, in Sunkara Satyanarayana v. State of Andhra Pradesh2,
a Coordinate Bench categorically observed that rowdy sheet cannot be
opened in a casual or mechanical manner. Mere dubbing of an individual
as a habitual offender is insufficient. The Police must exercise due care
1
2021 (2) ALT (Crl.) 161
2
2000(1) ALD (Crl.) 117 (AP)
6
Dr. YLR, J
W.P.No.1950 of 2026
Dated 17.03.2026
and caution before branding a person as a rowdy, and the essential
consideration is whether the acts of such person have a tendency to
disturb public peace and tranquility.
9. A careful reading of these precedents clearly indicates that the
creation or continuation of rowdy sheet requires strict adherence to
procedural safeguards and regular review by the statutorily designated
authorities. The Respondents are duty-bound to examine whether the
alleged misconduct genuinely affects public peace. In the present case, the
Petitioner was acquitted in the above mentioned crimes. In such
circumstances, the continuation of the impugned rowdy sheet amounts to
an arbitrary exercise of power and constitutes an abuse of process.
10. For the foregoing reasons, the Writ Petition is disposed of, declaring
that the continuation of the impugned rowdy sheet against the Petitioner is
illegal. The Respondent authorities are directed to forthwith close the said
rowdy sheet opened against the petitioner. No order as to costs.
As a sequel, Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
_________________________
DR. Y. LAKSHMANA RAO, J
Date: 17.03.2026
RSI
7
Dr. YLR, J
W.P.No.1950 of 2026
Dated 17.03.2026
189
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 1950 of 2026
Date: 17.03.2026
RSI
