Sri M P Nataraj v. The State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 27477 OF 2026 (GM-POLICE) BETWEEN:

SRI M P NATARAJ S/O MUNIKRISHNAPPA, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCCUPATION. AGRICULTURIST RESIDING AT KURUBARAHATTI (KURUBARA PETE), SULIBELE TOWN AND HOBLI, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN CODE-562129.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. MD. ABRAR.S. AND SRI. MOHAN KUMAR H G., ADVOCATES)

AND:

¶1THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU 560001.

¶2THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE HOSKOTE SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT – 562129

¶3THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE HOSKOTE SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT – 562129

by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶4THE POLICE INSPECTOR SULIBELE POLICE STATION, HOSKOTE TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562129 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SARITHA KULKARNI., AGA)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUNGED ORDER BEARING NO. SDPO/HSK/GC/206/2017 DATED 17-05-2017 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT/DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE HOSAKOTE SUB-DIVISION BENGALURU DISTRICT PERMITTING 4TH RESPONDENT TO OPEN AND MAINTAIN ROWDY C SHEET AGAINST THE PETITIONER HEREIN PRODUCED AND MARKED AT ANNEXURE -D IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

¶1Learned AGA accepts notice for respondents.

¶2The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a. QUASH No. Impunged order bearing No.SDPO/HSK/GC/206/2017 dated 17-05-2017 passed by 3rd respondent/Deputy Superintendent of Police Hosakote Sub-division Bengaluru District permitting 4th respondent to open and maintain Rowdy "C" Sheet against the petitioner herein produced and marked at Annexure D in the interest of justice and equity.

b. QUASH the Impugned order "C" Rowdy sheet dated 17-05-2017 opened with effect from 17-05-2017 and maintained till date Sheet against petitioner herein produced by the 4th respondent

Sulibelle Police Station produced and marked at Annexure-E in the interest of justice and equity.

c. Pass any other order as this Hon'ble Court deems fit, in the facts and circumstances of the case, including the cost of this petition, in the interest of justice and equity.

¶3A "C" Rowdy Sheet had been opened against the petitioner in respect to a solitary criminal complaint in Crime No.136 of 2016 for offences under Section 323, 324, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC. A charge sheet had been filed; the matter went to trial. Wherein, the petitioner was acquitted on

29.03.2025, despite which the rowdy sheet has continued till date.

¶4The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that;

4.1. the "C" Rowdy Sheet which had been opened on 17.05.2017, during the pendency of the proceedings in Crime No.136 of 2016 could not have survived or could not have been continued post acquittal of petitioner on

29.03.2025 or six (06) months thereafter. There being no other complaint or crime which has been registered against the petitioner.

4.2. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the name of the petitioner had

to be deleted from the "C" Rowdy Sheet which had been opened on 17.05.2017.

¶5Learned AGA submits that the petitioner is habitually raising disputes and/or filing complaints and it is in that background externment proceedings had also been initiated against the petitioner.

¶6For the purpose of opening of a rowdy sheeter it is not the complaint filed by the persons whose name is sought to be included in rowdy sheet, which is to be considered, but complaints filed against such a person. Merely because a person were to file a complaint does not mean that a rowdy sheet has to be opened for that reason.

¶7The methodology which has been followed by the respondent is contrary to the applicable law. There being no other complaint which had been filed against the petitioner, the opening a rowdy sheet on the basis of a solitary complaint in the year 2017 and even continuing it after the acquittal of the petitioner is contrary to the applicable law.

¶8In that view of the matter, this Court passes the following; ORDER i. The writ petition is allowed.

ii. A certiorari is issued, order dated

17.05.2017 passed by a respondent No.3 directing to open the "C" Rowdy Sheet in the name of the petitioner cannot survive post the acquittal of the petitioner as also for the reason that it could not have been opened on a solitary complaint. Hence said order dated

17.05.2017 at Annexure-D is quashed. iii. Consequently, the "C" Rowdy Sheet which has been opened against petitioner on 17.05.2017 at Annexure-E is also quashed.

Sd/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE

SR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19