Avinash Sharma vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

R.C. Khulbe, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for the following relief:-

I. Issue a writ, order of direction ini the nature of certiorari calling the record of history sheet of petitioner and quashing the History Sheet No.49/A registered on 05.03.1993 at Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar under regulation 228 of the U.P. Police regulation (as applicable in the State of Uttarakhand).

II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere in any manner on the liberty and peaceful activities of petitioner in the garb of impugned entry of the name of petitioner as history sheeter and his surveillance bearing History Sheet No.49/A registered on 05.03.1993 at Police Station Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

It is contented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a farmer and owns agricultural land at District Udham Singh Nagar. He is an income tax payee for the last several years. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that four cases are pending against him, as per the rejoinder affidavit to the present petition, but in all other cases the petitioner has been acquitted by the competent Court and no appeal is pending against him. False criminal cases cannot be said to be a criminal history of petitioner nor can the petitioner be said to be a habitual criminal. All the criminal cases were registered prior to 2011 and after 2011 no criminal case was registered against him.

From the perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the State, it is clear that at present no criminal case is pending against the present petitoner. When the history sheet was opened some criminal cases were pending but in these criminal cases, now the petitioner has been acquitted by the trial Court.

Question arises whether the respondent was justified in continuing with the surveillance and keeping the history sheet opened under Regulation 228 of the Police Regulations, which is extracted hereiunder:-

"228. Part V consists of history sheets. These are the personal records of criminal under surveillance. History-sheets should be opened only for persons who are or likely to become habitual criminals or abettors of such criminals.

There will be two classes of history-sheets:-

(1) Class A history-sheet for dacoits, burglars, cattle-thieves, railway-goods wagon thieves, and abettors thereof.

(2) Class B history-sheets for confirmed and professional criminals who commit crimes other than dacoity, burglary, cattle-theft, and theft from railway goods wagons, e.g. professional cheats and other experts for whom criminal personal files are maintained by the Criminal Investigation Department, poisoners, cattle poisoners, railway passenger thieves, bicycle thieves, expert pick-pockets, forgers, coiners, cocaine and opium smugglers, hired ruffians and goondas, telegraph wire-cutters, habitual illicit distillers and abettors thereof.

History sheets of both classes will be maintained in similar form, but those for class B will be distinguished by a red bar marked at the top of the first page. No history-sheet of class B may be converted into a history-sheet of Class A, though should be the subject of a history-sheet of class B be found to be also addicted to dacoity, burglary, cattle-theft or theft from railway goods wagons. A class, as well as B class, surveillance may under paragraph 238 be applied to him. In the event of a class A history-sheet man becoming addicted to miscellaneous crime his history-sheet may be converted into a class B history-sheet with the sanction of the Superintendent.

A perusal of the aforesaid Regulation indicates that a history sheet should be opened only for persons who are or likely to become habitual criminals or abettors of such criminals and that history sheet should be opened for criminals under surveillance. The history sheet has been divided into two classes and, for class A, the history sheets is for dacoits, burglars, cattle-thieves, railway-goods wagon thieves, and abettors thereof.

Now, in the instant case, the history sheet has been opened by the police in Class A, however, this Court finds that the petitioner has been acquitted in most of the cases that were opened. This Court finds that after 2011, no further case of any kind has been lodged agaisnt the petitoner. Regulation 231 provides the subjects of history-sheets of Class A will unless they are "starred" remain under surveillance for at least two consecutive years of which they have spent no part in jail. In the instant case, the petitoner has not "starred" and has not been convicted but the Court finds from a perual to the counter affidavit that continuous surveillance is being conducted for irrelevant reasons.

No plaussible reason for keeping the history sheet alive has been given. It is stated in the counter affidavit that history sheet has been opened on the basis of two criminal cases but now it is confirmed that the accused has been acquitted in both the cases.

Regulation 242 of the Police Regulations provides that "it is more important to open history sheet on conviction than on mere suspicion." The writ petitoner, as stated above, has not been convicted in any case.

In the light of the above observation, the Court is of the opinion that the ingredients mentioned under Reulgation 228 to open a history sheet agaisnt the petitoner are not existing. Whatever cases that were lodged agaisnt the petitoner have come to an end and the petitoner has been acquitted. There is no justification for the respondents to continue with the surveillance in the light of the fact that no activity of any sort has been reported agaisnt the petitoner after 2011 onwards.

Consequently, the history sheet no.49/A dated 05.03.1993, registered at P.S. Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar agaisnt the petitoner under Regulations 228 of the U.P. Police regulations (applicable in the State of Uttarakhand) is hereby quashed. The writ petition is dispoed of accordingly.

Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.