Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 35902
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
L. Victoria Gowri, J
Prathab – Appellant
Versus
The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District, Trichy – Respondent
WP CRL.(MD) No.2003 of 2026 | W.P.(MD)No.19651 of 2017 | S.C.No.277 of 2019
For Petitioner:Mr. R.Rajaraman, Advocate
For Respondents:Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
Police must provide reasoned orders under PSO 748 to retain history sheeters beyond stipulated period, balancing public order with Article 21 rights.
Headnote:First Paragraph: Under Article 226, petitioner sought mandamus for removal from history sheet H.S.No.1 of 2024 per Police Standing Orders (PSO) 746-748. Petitioner, acquitted in murder case under Sections 294(b), 506(ii), 302 r/w 34 IPC (S.C.No.277/2019), faced false Section 110 Cr.P.C. cases. Court found police failed to justify retention beyond stipulated period without reasoned orders. Second Paragraph: Issue: Whether police followed PSO for history sheet retention post-acquittal? Ratio: History sheets monitor habitual offenders; closure mandatory under PSO 748 absent valid materials; retention requires ASP/Deputy SP orders with reasons balancing Article 21 rights, per DGP circular Rc.No.66569/Crime 3(2)/2019. Third Paragraph: Writ petition stands disposed of with direction to consider representation dated 06.02.2026 within four weeks.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's acquittal and false cases background. (Para 2) |
| 2. pso principles for history sheet opening and closure. (Para 3) |
| 3. direct consideration of representation per dgp circular. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
ORDER
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to remove the petitioner's name from the History Sheet in H.S.No. 1 of 2024, by considering the petitioner's representation dated
06.02.2026.
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a coolie worker and he has not involved in any of the criminal activities. He further submitted that the fourth respondent has registered false cases as against the petitioner in Crime No.13 of 2019 for the alleged offences under Section 294(b), 506(ii), 302 r/w 34 of IPC. The petitioner is arrayed as the second accused in the case and the same was culminated in filing a final report before the I Additional District and Sessions Court(PCR), Tiruchirappalli in S.C.No.277 of 2019. The petitioner was acquitted in the case on 02.01.2024. Thereafter, the third and fourth respondents filed five false cases against the petitoner under Section 110 of Cr.P.C. The petitioner was produced before the Revenue Court, Lalkudi and assured that he will not involve in any criminal activities. Without considering the same, the third respondent has opened the History Sheet in H.S.No.1 of 2024 as against the petitioner. Seeking removal of the same, this petition is filed.
3. 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 offences in an effective manner.
c. History Sheet can be opened by the concerned Police Station under two circumstances. The first circumstance is provided under PSO No.746, which states that the history sheet can be opened against a person who is a resident (permanently or temporarily) within the station limit, who is known or believed to be addicted to commission of crime, whether convicted or not. Here the thrust is on the habituality or the propensity to commit a crime by a person, which is sought to be monitored by opening a history sheet.
d. The second category of persons against whom history sheet can be opened are the persons, who are convicted for various offences that has been listed in PSO No.747, wherein opening of the history sheet is automatic.
e. In the first category of opening history sheet, month wise scrutiny or a close watch on the person concerned is contemplated. Here also there is sub-categorization as, close watch bad chara
