IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that acquittal does not negate the police's discretion to maintain a surveillance register based on reasonable belief of habitual offending.

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J (Oral): Prayer in the present petition is for issuance of directions to the respondents to remove the name of the petitioner as a Bad Character from Code-B after closing the history sheet and also from the surveillance register maintained by the police.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is a respectable person in the society and has remained Vice President of Municipal Committee, Narnaul and has been elected thrice as a counsellor by the Committee. He contends that various false FIRs had been registered against the petitioner on account of political rivalry and that he already stands acquitted in the said FIRs that were registered against him. The police has however still incorporated the name of the petitioner in the Surveillance register notwithstanding the acquittal/discharge of the petitioner in the said FIRs. He contends that the same has an impairment on the reputation and social acceptance of the petitioner. He thus, prays that his name be deleted from the surveillance register.

3. A reply by way of an affidavit of Vinod Kumar HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narnaul, District Mahendergarh (Haryana) on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3, has been filed wherein it has been averred that the petitioner was involved in as many as 22 criminal cases and that investigation in FIR No.79 dated 03.02.2023 registered at Police Station, City Narnaul is still pending. It has further been averred in the said reply that the petitioner had earlier approached the High Court by way of CWP-26626-2018 titled as Kailash Chand Soni Vs. State of Haryana which was disposed of vide order dated 01.11.2018 directing the police to decide the representation regarding inclusion of the name of the petitioner in the surveillance register. On consideration of the said representation, an order dated 18.01.2019 was passed by the Superintendent of Police and it was held that the petitioner remained habitual of committing offences since 2002 and in a period of 19 years, he was an accused in as many as 18 cases. It pertains to allegations of roughing up with government officials and entering office of Registrar of U.T. and also criminal intimidation and beatings.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has controverted that Rule 23.12 deals with treatment of history sheet and that under clause (1) thereof, the history sheet and personal file of the person who is no longer addicted to crime is required to be transferred to his personal file. Further, it provides that under no circumstance shall the history sheet of a person who is undergoing sentence be relegated to his personal file. He contends that since the petitioner has already been acquitted, hence, his history sheet shall be required to be confined and history sheet of the person undergoing sentence would not be relegated to his personal file.

5. However, learned counsel for the petitioner fails to explain as to how the said relevant aspect dealing of treatment of history sheet to personal files is relevant for the purposes of taking a decision as to whether name of a person is required to be kept under surveillance register No.10 under Rule 23.4. The treatment of history sheet in personal file is a distinct act as compared to keeping the name in the surveillance register for maintenance law and order.

6. Learned State counsel submits that the surveillance register No.10 is maintained as Per The Punjab Police Rules, Clause 23.4 (3) (b). The relevant provision is extracted as under:-

“23.4.Surveillance Register No.X.

(1) In every police station, other than those of the railway police, a Surveillance Register shall be maintained in Form 23.4 (1).

(2) In Part I of such register shall be entered the names of persons commonly resident within or commonly frequenting the local jurisdiction of the police station concerned, who belong to one or more of the following classes: -

(a) All persons who have been proclaimed under section 87, Code of Crimina