The designation of an individual as a history sheeter must adhere strictly to procedural requirements, with due consideration given to acquittals and justification for surveillance, in accordance with the principles of fair play and justice.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Art.226 of the Constitution of India, seeking Writ of Certiorari, to quash the entry of his name from Surveillance Register No. 10 recorded by the respondents and history sheet opened in the name of the petitioner.

2. With a view to understand the background in the light of which the present controversy has arisen, it is deemed appropriate to narrate some of the material facts in brief:
02.1 That an Arms Licence No. DMJ / 2006-07/95 dated 05.02.2007 was issued in favour of the petitioner by the concerned authorities and that because of the peculiar situation in the UT of J and K, the petitioner along with others having licenced weapons was directed to deposit his weapon, in compliance whereof, the petitioner deposited his weapon with Respondent No. 3;
02.2 That after some time, he went to collect his weapon back, however, a copy of Roznamcha was handed over to him, whereby he was informed that because of he, being a history sheeter, his licence has been cancelled by the respondent No. 2 - District Magistrate, Jammu; that the name of the petitioner has been entered in the Surveillance Register No. 10 and a history sheet has been opened in his name by the respondents No. 2 and 4;
02.3 That the petitioner approached the office of the respondent No. 2 to enquire about why his licence has been cancelled when there is no FIR or any chargesheet pending against him; that on an application filed, the petitioner was issued the copy of the order issued by the Additional District Magistrate Jammu, whereby his licence had been cancelled.

3. It is further pleaded that the petitioner in his prime youth was falsely implicated and challaned / chargesheeted by the police agency in following four different cases registered vide:
(i) FIR No. 79/2002 under S.341/323 RPC; Police Station, Pacca Danga, Jammu;
(ii) FIR No. 81/2003 under S.354 RPC; Police Station, Bus Stand Jammu;
(iii) FIR No. 14/2006 under S.341/323 RPC; Police Station Bus Stand, Jammu and
(iv) FIR No. 69/2008 under S.302 RPC; Police Station, Bus Stand, Jammu;
that the petitioner after going through the full fledged trial, was acquitted by the trial courts in all the FIRs except FIR No. 14/2006; that the entry of the name of the petitioner in the Surveillance Register No. 10 and the opening of the history sheet in his name by the respondent No. 3 is an action, contrary to the procedure laid down in the J and K Police Rules, 1960, thus being illegal, without jurisdiction and in arbitrary exercise of powers by the police authorities.

4. Pursuant to notice, the respondents have filed reply / objections to the petition asserting therein that the petitioner is notorious criminal against whom 04 FIRs had been registered from the year 2002 to 2008 in different police stations of district Jammu i.e., 03 at Police Station Bus Stand and 01 at Police Station, Pacca Danga Jammu; that the petitioner has raised disputed questions of facts which cannot be decided in a writ petition as such, the petitioner cannot take recourse to the remedy under the writ jurisdiction; that it was utmost essential or mandatory for police to have surveillance on the petitioner on the basis of the history sheet which has been opened in the year 2009 by the then SHO Police Station, Pacca Danga, Jammu; that such a person who is a threat to the society could not be set free without a surveillance; that the licence of the weapon of the petitioner has been cancelled by following procedure vide SSP Letter No. CRB / 2020/37759-60 / DPOJ dated 29.07.2020; that although the petitioner has been acquitted in all the cases yet till dat