IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2632/2005 (Dal Chand Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.) DATE OF ORDER : 24.10.2007 HON'BLE DR. VINEET KOTHARI,J. Mr.Pradeep Choudhary, for the petitioner. Mr.O. P. Boob, G.A., for the respondent State. BY THE COURT: Heard learned counsel for the parties. This petition is filed by the petitioner with the following reliefs claimed in the petition: 1. By an appropriate writ, order or direction may kindly be issued that the respondent No. 4 shall not make entry of the petitioner's name in the Surveillance/History-Sheet Register. 2. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondent No. 4 may kindly be restrained from making the entry in the Surveillance Register and also be restrained from opening the History-Sheet at Police Station, Pratap Nagar, Bhilwara. 3. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may be restrained from taking any action against the petitioner is pursuance of the entry, if any, be made in the Surveillance Register/History-Sheet Register maintained at Police Station, Pratap Nagar, Bhilwara. 4. Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner. The State has filed its reply in the matter controverting the averments made in the writ petition and has stated in the reply, which is verified by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Mr. Mohd. Faruq Khan, Police Station, Pratap Nagar, Bhilwara that the petitioner was found to be involved in various criminal activities and besides three FIRs, details of which have been given by the petitioner in para No. 4 of the writ petition, there were some more crimes committed by him and he was sought to be put in the records under the Police Rules in Surveillance Register and thereafter, if necessary in the History-Sheet Register. The contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he being a politician, the alleged FIRs have been registered against him on account of political rivalries and the police authorities are unnecessarily harassing him and they seek to mar his political caree by recording his name in the Surveillance Register maintained under Rule 4.4 of the Police Rules of 1965. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the pleadings of both the sides, this Court is not inclined to invoke the extra-ordinary jurisdiction in this matter. The law should be allowed to take its own course and if certain FIRs have been registered against the petitioner, the needful investigation and trial, if necessary have to follow. It would be premature at this stage & wrong to prevent such course of law by a writ of mandamus to the police authorities. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied on the judgment of this Court in Kande Khan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. S. B. Civil Writ Petition No.4687/1994 decided on 19.12.1994. In the said case, this Court dealt with Rule 4.9 regarding History-Sheet. This Court held that the conditions for entering the names of those petitioners in the History-Sheet were not satisfied and therefore, no such entries could be made in the History-Sheet of the names of the petitioners in those cases. The facts of cases, which were decided by this Court on 19.12.1994 (Supra) are apparently different and the said judgment therefore, cannot be applied with the facts of the present case. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed, as being devoid of merit. (Dr. VINEET KOTHARI) J. preety Item No. 15