1. The common issue that has arisen for consideration before this Court in all the above cases is as to whether the continuance of the petitioners to be categorized as “History Sheeters” is legal and is in consonance with the relevant Police Standing Orders.

2. The scope of the relevant Police Standing Orders namely PSO Nos.741 to 748, has been a subject matter of consideration in various judgments of this Court and the law is no longer res integra. There is nothing new that is to be said in this judgment except to reiterate the settled position and to see, if it has been properly followed in all the cases, wherein the continuance of the persons branded as history sheeters, is under challenge.

3. This Court in Ganesan Vs The District Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar reported in 2010 (6) CTC 507 has considered the law in detail. The relevant portions of the judgment are extracted hereunder :

“45. Reading of the Police Standing Orders dealing with opening and retention of history sheets for different kinds of persons, such as, convicts, rowdies, known depredators, suspects and others shows that the authorities who are empowered to open and retain such sheets, have to arrive at a subjective satisfaction, as to whether the abovesaid persons, either by habit or disposition commit, attempt to commit, aid or abet the commission of offences involving breach of peace. An isolated act or commission cannot be characterised as a habitual act or commission involving breach of peace or law and order. While forming an opinion that the person is believed to be addicted to or aid or abet, the commission of crime, whether convicted or not, the Sub-Inspector of Police and his men have to collect information and that the same has to be ascertained before making a recommendation to an officer of and above the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, in whose jurisdiction, such person is ordinarily resident either permanently or temporarily.

46. Opening of history sheet in the case of persons convicted for offences involving imprisonment for life under Chapter XII and XVII and conviction for offences under Section 395 to 402, I.P.C. in the case of professional prisoners, Sections 392 to 394, I.P.C. and under Sections 75 of the Indian Penal Code, house breaking theft Section 109 Cr.P.C., 110 Cr.P.C. depending upon the number of convictions stated in Police Standing Order 747, is automatic, at the time of conviction of such persons.

47. Whereas, in the case of opening of history sheets for rowdies as per Form 112, where, some persons are classified as rowdies, the orders of the Superintendent of Police or concerned Sub-divisional Officer have to be obtained, on the basis of the information and facts ascertained by the Station House Officer, and his men. Persons who habitually commit, attempt to commit, or abet, the commission of offences involving breach of peace or (b) Persons bound over under Sections 106 and 107, Criminal Procedure Code or (c) Persons who have been convicted under Section 75 of the Madras City Police Act or twice in two consecutive years, under Section 3 Clause 12 of the Town Nuisance Act, or (d) Persons either convicted under Section 49-A of the Madras City Police Act, 1888 (Madras Act III of 1888) or under Section 4 of the Madras Gaming Act, 1930 (Madras Act III of 1930), or reasonably suspected to be habitually committing or abetting the commission of the offences, are classified as rowdies. Clause 4 of Police Standing Order 749, enjoins a duty on the police to enter the names of history-sheeted rowdies in the station register of a known depredator and that rowdies should be checked regularly by beat Police Constable Constables in rural Police Stations and by rowdy patrols in large towns, as also by the Sub-Inspectors (Law and Order). The checking, however should be discretely done by the method of enquiries and not in the manner of domiciliary checks.

48. Police Standing Order dealing w