IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
Liyakat Shah - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc. (Pet.) No. 1968 of 2025
Decided On : 22-04-2025
(A) Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965 - Rules 4.4 and 4.9 - Rajasthan Habitual Offenders Act, 1953 - Petition to quash orders directing the opening and transfer of a history sheet against the petitioner - The petitioner argued that he does not meet the criteria for being labeled a habitual offender under the Rules or the Act. (Paras 4, 5, 8, 9)
(B) Judicial Scrutiny - The court established criteria for sustaining a history sheet, requiring either three convictions or more than ten cases against a person, with specific conditions regarding the age of convictions. (Paras 8, 11.1, 11.2)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the orders from 2000 and 2006 that opened a history sheet against him, asserting he does not qualify as a habitual offender.
Findings of Court:
The court quashed the impugned orders and directed the removal of the petitioner's name from the history sheet.
Issues: The main issues were whether the petitioner qualifies as a habitual offender under the relevant rules and the validity of the history sheet.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that a history sheet can only be maintained if the individual has three convictions or more than ten cases, with specific conditions regarding the age of those cases.
Result: Petition allowed.
ORDER :
1. This criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with a prayer that the impugned orders dated 10.10.2000 & 27.03.2006 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Bikaner directing opening and transfer of the history sheet of the petitioner be quashed and set aside.
2. Brief facts of the case as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner are that on 10.10.2000, the Station House Officer, P.S. Kotgate, District Bikaner, upon the application received from the Superintendent of Police, District Bikaner passed the impugned order, whereby the direction was given to open the history sheet against the petitioner.
3. The details of cases registered against the petitioner in the District Bikaner are as under:
| S. No. | FIR No. Police Station | Offence U/s | Police Station | Decision/ Result |
| 1. | 133/ 08.09.96 | 307, 147 and 120-B of IPC | Sadar | Acquitted due to lack of evidence on 27.04.2005 |
| 2. | 323/ 12.09.96 | 307, 323, 452, 506, 147, 148, 149 & 120-B of IPC | Sadar | Acquitted on the basis of compromise on 27.07.2011 |
| 3. | 247/ 31.08.2012 | 302, 323, 147, 148 & 149 of IPC | Kotgate | Acquitted on 10.07.08 |
| 4. | 45/ 30.01.95 | 323, 341, 147, 148, 149 of IPC | Sadar, Bikaner | FR accepted |
| 5. | 14/ 25.11.99 | 307, 324, 323, 341, 147, 148 and 149 of IPC | Jamsar | Acquitted on the basis of compromise on 15.06.2015 |
| 6. | Complaint | 110 Cr.P.C./ 12.04.06 (challan) | SDM Bikaner | Bound on 10.05.06 |
| 7. | Complaint | 110 Cr.P.C. | SDM Bikaner | Bound on 14.05.07 |
| 8. | Complaint | 110 Cr.P.C./ 11.11.08 | SDM Bikaner | - |
| 9. | Complaint | 110 Cr.P.C./10.01.10 | SDM Bikaner | Bound |
| 10. | Complaint | 110 Cr.P.C./15.03.11 | SDM Bikaner | Bound |
| 11 | Complaint | 110 Cr.P.C./ 06.04.12 | SDM Bikaner | Bound |
| 12. | Complaint | 107, 116 (3) Cr.P.C./ 17.10.13 | SDM Bikaner | - |
| 13. | Complaint 9.12.2014 | 110 Cr.P.C./ 10.12.14 | SDM Bikaner | - |
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per Rule 4.4 and Rule 4.9 of the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965, the history- sheet can be opened if the name of a person is entered in the surveillance Register and if person falls under the essential Ingredients provided in Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Rules of 1965') as well as definition of the Habitual offender under the Rajasthan Habitual Offenders Act, 1953. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petitioner is not falling under the definition of Habitual offender and also does not fall under the Rule 4.4 and Rule 4.9 of the Rules of 1965.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that as per Rule 4.9 of the Rules of 1965, the concerned officer should have reasonable belief that a person is habitually addicted to crime or to be aider or abettor; the petitioner does not even fall under the category of Habitual Offender.
6. On the other hand, learned Dy.G.A. opposed the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner was declared as the history sheeter, which is valid in eye of the law and the concerned Superintendent of Police came to such conclusion, after duly looking into the overall facts and circumstances of the present case and the material available before him.
7. Heard learned counsel for both the parties at Bar as well as perused the record of the case.
8. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of Sanjay Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 792/2016) along with other connected matters decided on 23.01.2023, as also in the case of Rakesh Alias Rekhraj Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 6584/2022) decided on 23.01.2023, which were also pertaining to opening of the history-sheet, observed as under:-
“11. While considering Rules 4.4 and 4.9 of the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965 as well as the judgment cited, this Court observes that for sustaining a history-sheet against a person, either a person has to have three cases of convictions which would bring him within the domain of the definition of "Habitual Offender" so that he could be declared as a history-sheeter, by entering his name in the surveillance register, or as per Rule 4.9 of the
A history sheet can only be maintained if an individual has three convictions or more than ten cases, subject to specific conditions regarding the age of those cases.
A history sheet can only be maintained if a person has three consecutive convictions or more than ten cases, subject to judicial scrutiny.
A history sheet can only be sustained if an individual has three consecutive convictions or more than ten cases, with specific conditions regarding the age of convictions.
A history sheet can only be sustained if a person has three convictions or more than ten cases, subject to specific time constraints on older cases.
A history sheet can only be sustained if a person has three convictions or more than ten cases, with specific conditions regarding the age of cases.
The criteria for maintaining a history-sheet require either three convictions or more than ten cases against an individual, irrespective of outcomes.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.