SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(SC) 498

B.C.RAY, J.S.VERMA, K.JAGANNATHA SHETTY, L.M.SHARMA, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH
K. Veeraswami – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


(1) IT is not in dispute that the police under the U.P. Police Regulation has opened a History Sheet against the appellant. Challenging the validity of maintaining the History Sheet, the appellant moved the High Court for relief. The High court has rejected his writ petition. In this appeal, it is contended that maintaining the History Sheet against the appellant does not fall within the paragraph 228 of the UP Police regulations. We have perused the said paragraph and also the provisions of paragraph 240. We have also considered the facts and circumstances of the case. We are of the opinion that no interference is called for in this case. However, it is open to the appellant to make representation to the District Superintendent of Police to close the History Sheet on the ground that nothing has been alleged or attributed against him since then. If any such representation is made, the Superintendent of Police shall consider it according to law and make appropriate order. With these observations, the appeal is disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top