[2026:RJ-JD:11816]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3349/2025 Abdul Hamid S/o Shri Abdul Gani Sheikh, Aged About 55 Years, Bajranjgarh, Police Station Hathuniya, District Pratapgarh.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Superintendent Of Police, Pratapgarh

2. Station House Officer, Station House Officer, Ps Hathuniya, District Pratapgarh ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramesh Chandra Purohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vikram Rajpurohit, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU

Order

12/03/2026

1. This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this misc.

petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order passed by Superintendent of Police, Bhilwara for opening history-sheet against the petitioner may kindly be quashed and set aside and the respondents may kindly be directed to close the history sheet of the petitioner.”

2. The petitioner has approached this Hon’ble Court challenging the order dated 29.05.2020 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh, whereby a history sheet was directed to be opened against the petitioner. The petitioner submits that except for one FIR No.187/2007 registered about 20 years ago, he has never been convicted of any offence. The impugned action was taken despite the petitioner not falling within the categories prescribed under Rule 4.4 of the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965, which governs entry of names in the surveillance register and opening of history sheets. The petitioner obtained the relevant information through the Right to Information Act, 2005, revealing the impugned order. It is contended that the opening of the history sheet is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965. The said action has caused unnecessary harassment, social stigma and interference with the petitioner’s personal liberty. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present petition seeking quashing of the order dated 29.05.2020 and the history sheet opened against him.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per Rule 4.4 and Rule 4.9 of the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965, the history- sheet can be opened if the name of a person is entered in the surveillance register and if the person falls under the essential ingredients provided in the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965 (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Rules of 1965’), as well as the definition of ‘Habitual Offender’ under the Rajasthan Habitual Offenders Act, 1953. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petitioner does not fall under the definition of Habitual Offender and also does not fall under Rule 4.4 and Rule 4.9 of the Rules of 1965.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that as per Rule 4.9 of the Rules of 1965, the concerned officer should have a reasonable belief that a person is habitually addicted to crime or is an aider or abettor; the petitioner does not even fall under the category of Habitual Offender.

5. On the other hand, learned Dy.G.A. while filing reply to misc. petition has opposed the aforesaid submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner was declared a history-sheeter, which is valid in the eye of law, and the concerned Superintendent of Police came to such conclusion after duly looking into the overall facts and circumstances of the present case and the material available before him in reply the details of cases registered against the petitioner in the District Pratapgarh are provided, which are as under:

6. Heard learned counsel for both parties as well as perused the record of the case.

7. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of Sanjay Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.792/2016) along with other connected matters decided on 23.01.2023, as also in the case of Rakesh Alias Rekhraj Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petitio