Police surveillance must be justified by credible evidence, respecting individual rights and adhering to procedural rules.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner herein has maintained the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for seeking the following relief:

(i) Writ of mandamus directing and commanding the respondents No. 2 to 4 to remove, discontinue/delete the name of the petitioner from surveillance register No. 10 and as a history sheeter in Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, which is against the Rule-698 to Rule-704 of Jammu and Kashmir Police Rules, 1960;

(ii) Writ of mandamus directing the respondents No. 2 to 4 to remove the photographs of the petitioner as a history sheeter fixed in the Police Station, which is totally against the Rules 698 to 704 of Jammu and Kashmir Police Rules, 1960.

(iii) Any other order to be passed as additional/alternate relief to which the petitioner is found entitled to in the given facts and circumstances of the case in hand in order to delivery fair and impartial justice.”

2. The facts as stated in the petition on the strength of which the aforesaid reliefs have been sought are that the petitioner is a business man being highest tax payer to the Government got implicated as an accused in FIR No. 247/2009 registered with Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu for offences under Sections 302, 34, 201 and 120-B RPC and Sections 3, 25 and 27 of the Arms Act along with his son, namely Jatinder Singh (now deceased) and brothers, namely, Jagar Singh and Rakesh Choudhary, wherein in the said FIR, after trial in the charge sheet laid from the said FIR, the petitioner herein came to be acquitted by the court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu on 10.08.2020 and that prior to the registration of the said FIR, the petitioner have had also been got implicated in FIR 107/2006 registered with Police Station, Bahu Fort, Jammu in connection with the murder of five persons in which FIR after laying of charge sheet and trial thereon as well, the petitioner came to be acquitted by the court of Principal Sessions Judge, Jammu on 02.02.2015 and besides the said FIR, the petitioner also came to be implicated as an accused in FIR No. 275/2009 along with his above named brothers for commission of offence under section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, which, however, came to be closed as “Not Admitted”, however, stands reopened by the court of competent jurisdiction and is under further investigation and in addition thereto, a complaint under sections 107 and 117 Cr.P.C. has also been instituted against the petitioner and his aforenamed brother-Rakesh Choudhary which is pending before Executive Magistrate 1st Class, Bahu Fort, Jammu.

3. The petitioner has stated in the petition that the respondents on 09.05.2010 entered his and his above named brothers’ names in Surveillance Register 10 of the Police Rules, 1960 besides opening a history sheet in Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, aggrieved whereof, the petitioner herein has maintained the instant petition on the following grounds:

A) That the action of the respondents No. 2 to 4 entering the names of the petitioner in the Surveillance Register-10 under Rule-698 and opening of the history sheet under Rule 702 is totally against the Jammu and Kashmir Police Rules, 1960. Copy of relevant portion of the Jammu and Kashmir Police Rules, 1960 is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure-II. As the petitioner has not been convicted thrice or more mentioned in Rule-698. From the perusal of Rule-702 it becomes clear that when the history sheet of a person is opened, a great care caution has to be exercised by the Police Incharge of a Police station or any other competent officer. The said Rule provides the particulars and the manner in which those particulars are to be recorded in the history sheet. It is clear that before branding a person as a history sheeter and entering his particulars in history sheet, a great care and caution has to be taken by the officer. While surveillance of movement of a person, is permissible inaccordance with the provisions contained in