Back
2022 Supreme(Mad) 1244
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
N. Dhilipan - Appellant
Versus
The District Superintendent of Police, Office of the District Superintendent of Police, Salem & Others - Respondent
W.P. No. 5107 of 2022
Decided On : 08-03-2022
For the Petitioner:G. Mohanakrishnan, Advocate. For the Respondents: A. Gokulakrishnan, Additional Public Prosecutor.
Fair and reasonable decision based on valid materials and reasons is essential for retaining a person as a history sheeter beyond the stipulated period.
Headnote:
Writ Petition - Representation for removal from History Sheet - PSO No.742, 746, 747, 748 - The court discussed the principles related to the maintenance of history sheets, including the criteria for opening, reviewing, and discontinuing history sheets, as well as the need for fair and reasonable decisions based on valid materials and reasons. The court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders within four weeks.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought the removal of his name from the History Sheet 451/2017 of Mettur Police Station, citing harassment and false complaints against him.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders within four weeks.
Issues: Petitioner's representation for removal from History Sheet, alleged harassment by police, failure of respondents to consider the representation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles related to the maintenance of history sheets and directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders within four weeks.
Final Decision: The writ petition stands disposed of with the direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders within four weeks. No costs.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ, directing the respondents to consider any representation made in letter dated 11.02.2022 to the respondents, to remove my name from the History Sheet 451/2017 of Mettur Police Station which has been mechanically maintained.)
1. The Writ Petition has been filed to direct the Respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 11.02.2022 and to remove the name of the petitioner in the History Sheet 451/2017 of Mettur Police Station.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is residing at Mettur along with his parents and he running a shop name Legendz. a farmer. Based on the false complaint, the third respondent police had implicated the petitioner as accused for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 324 & 307 IPC in Crime No.33 of 2017. Even though, the petitioner is not involved in any further criminal activities, at the instigation of the superior officers in the Police Department, History Sheeted Rowdy Book was opened in HS.No.451 of 2017 at the third respondent police station, in order to harass the petitioner and to restrict his movements. Taking advantage of the same, the third respondent, based on the false complaint given by one Prabhakaran, a case in Crime No.197 of 2018 was registered against the petitioner for the offence under Sections 294 (b), 323, 354 & 506(2) IPC, in which the petitioner has not yet proved guilty. The petitioner was constantly compelled to attend the police station in the pretext of enquiry. In this regard, the petitioner had made a representation on 11.02.2022 to the respondents to delete his name from the History Sheet book, but the respondents have not yet considered till date. Therefore, he sought for allowing the writ petition.
3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that the petitioner is an habitual offender indulging in rowdy activities, extortion, etc. Hence, History Sheeted Rowdy Book was opened at the third respondent police station as against the petitioner and it is being extended regularly as per the Police Standing Order. Therefore, he prays to dismiss the writ petition.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.
5. The issue involved in this writ petition has already been dealt with by the Madurai Bench of this Court and detailed order has been passed in W.P.(MD)No.19651 of 2017 on 26.09.2018. On the basis of the above said Order, the Director General Of Police, Chennai issued a circular in Rc.No. 66569/Crime 3(2)/2019 dated 24.04.2019, which reads as follows :-
7. From the above judgments the following principles emerge insofar as history sheeters are concerned:
a. In order to facilitate the study of crime and criminals, the Police Standing Orders provides a mechanism, whereby every Police Station shall maintain a crime history, which shall be a confidential record. In this record all cases of crime that are mentioned in PSO No.742, which provides various classes of crime, shall be entered and even an attempt to commit those offences, are entered in the records maintained in the Police Station.
b. These crime records maintained by the Various Police Stations shall be reviewed every year by the Inspector of Police of the concerned Police Station. On such review, the Inspector of Police has to furnish a concise appreciation of the year's crime for the benefit of the Superior Officers and also to make suggestions in order to improve the quality of crime control. The review undertaken by the Inspector of Police is not merely a catalogue of the crime in the year. It should reflect the valuable suggestions in order to prevent such crimes in future and to provide ways and means of handling serious offe
