AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Krishna S.Dixit, J
Petitioner aggrieved by his rowdy sheeting is knocking at the doors or writ Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that there is only one criminal case pending since 2016 and therefore, one salutary case should not brand him as a rowdy sheeter. Even otherwise, he submits his client is having good conduct & demeanor after the registration of the said case and therefore, it is not fair to have such a person in the Rowdy Sheet.
Learned AGA on request having accepted notice for the respondents opposes the writ petition contending that whether one should be rowdy sheeted or not, is a matter pertaining to the domain of the jurisdictional police wherein a host of factors enter and therefore, Writ Court should not grant indulgence. He also submits that there are two criminal cases and not only one pending against the petitioner.
However, having contended as above, now the learned AGA fairly agrees with the suggestion of this Court that petitioner be permitted to make a representation in the light of decision of this Court in W.P.No.4504/2021(GM-POLICE) & Connected Matters between SRI B.S.PRAKASH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS, disposed off on 22.04.2022, which would be considered by the jurisdictional police in the light of observations made therein and in accordance with law, in a time bound way. This is appreciable.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed off reserving liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate representation as observed above. If such a representation is made, the same shall be considered within an outer limit of eight weeks.
All contentions are kept open.
Costs made easy.