I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL Criminal Writ Petition No. 20 of 2008 (M/ B) Dr. Gufran Ali S/o Mohd. Ayub Quarashi R/o Village Kotwal, Police Station Jhabreda, District Haridwar. ……………Petitioner. Versus (1) State of Uttarakhand, through S.S.P. Haridwar, District Haridwar. (2) S.O. Jhabreda, District Haridwar. …………Respondents. Sri Manish Arora, Advocate for the petitioner, Sri Amit Bhatt, Additional Government Advocate, for the State- respondents. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. [Oral- Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.] By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the history sheet of the petitioner. Also, a mandamus has been sought directing respondents No. 1 and 2 not to harass the petitioner without any reason. (2) Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition are that petitioner possesses degree of D.U.M. and practices medicine in Village Kotwal, Police 2 Station Jhabreda, District Haridwar. It is further stated that petitioner was allegedly implicated in Case Crime No. 28 of 2000, relating to offences punishable under Sections 392, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Jwalapur, District Haridwar. However, he was acquitted of the charge relating to said offences vide order dated 29.11.2001, passed by Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, in Criminal Case No. 1991 of 2001. It is alleged in the writ petition that the Station House Officer of Police Station Jhabreda is harassing the petitioner even after his acquittal by doing night surveillance of the house of the petitioner. Lastly, it is stated that the petitioner has made a representation to stop the harassment, but to no avail. Hence, the petition. (3) From the counter affidavit, it appears that the petitioner’s name figures in the Police record as a history sheeter and to maintain law and order Police is keeping surveillance. However, it is denied that the respondents are harassing the petitioner. (4) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the relevant provisions of law. Para 228 of U.P. Police Regulations (applicable in Uttarakhand) reads as under:- “228. Part V consists of history sheet. These are the personal records of criminals under surveillance. History-sheets should be opened only for persons who are or likely to 3 become habitual criminal or abettors of such criminals. There will be two classes of history- sheets. (1) Class A history-sheets 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 4 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. (5) Paras 231, 232 and 233 of U.P. Police Regulations (applicable in Uttarakhand), which pertain to surveillance of the history-sheeter read as under. “231. The subjects of history-sheets of class A will unless they are “starred” remain under surveillance for at least two consecutive year of which they have spent no part in jail. When the subject of a history-sheet of class A whose name has not been “starred” who has never been convicted of cognizable offence and has not been in jail or suspected of any offence or absented himself in suspicious circumstances for two consecutive years his surveillance will be discontinued, unless for special reasons to be recorded in the inspection book of the police station the Superintendent decides that it should continue. When the subject of a history-sheet of class A is “starred” he will remain starred for at least two consecutive years during which he has not been in jail or been suspected of a cognizable offence or had any suspicious absence recorded against him. At the end of that period if he is believed to have reformed he 5 will cease to be “starred” but will remain subject to surveillance will be discontinued only if during that period no complaints have been recorded against him. In closing the history-sheets of an “unstaring” ex-convicts and especially ex- convict dacoits great care should be exercised. 232. History-sheet of B class will be continuously open records and the subjects of these sheets will, except for every special reasons remain under surveillance until death. This being so it is unnecessary to “star” suspects of this class. 233. The discontinuance of surveillance of the subject of a history-sheet does not entail closing that history-sheet. A history-sheet which is only a record of information need never be considered closed. In the case of persons whose surveillance is discontinued a note should be made to this effect in the history-sheet, and thereafter no periodical or other entries need be made unless something comes to notice which it is desirable to enter in the sheet. Sheets persons whose surveillance has been discontinued should remain in these village crime–note book but if the number is as much as to make the volume too bulky, they should be kept in a separate volume attached to the note-book. They will only be destroyed on the 6 death of the subject of the sheet, or if, not opinion of the Superintendent their further retention is not likely to be of any value.” (6) From the perusal of the affidavits filed on behalf of the parties, it appears that the petitioner’s name as history-sheeter figures in class A. However, the respondents have not disclosed if any other crime is registered against the petitioner except Case Crime No. 28 of 2000, relating to offences punishable under Sections 392, 411 I.P.C., Police Station Jwalapur, District Haridwar, in respect of which he has already been acquitted. (7) Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the papers on record, we dispose of this writ petition with following direction:- That the petitioner shall make a representation to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Haridwar, for redressal of his grievances, within a period of one month, which may be decided by said authority within a period of one month thereafter in accordance with law and the provisions of Police Regulations. (Interim Relief Application and Urgency Application No. 507 of 2009 also stand disposed of). (B.S. Verma, J.) (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 02.03.2009 NS 7