Delhi High Court
Dharmender Singh vs State Nct Of Delhi & Ors. on 27 November, 2013
Author: G. S. Sistani
$~06.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 1724/2012
% Judgment dated 27.11.2013
DHARMENDER SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.Sameer Chandra, Adv.
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr.Saleem Ahmed, ASC for the State.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
G.S.SISTANI, J (ORAL)
1. By the present petition, petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus
directing respondents to remove the name and entries related to the
petitioner from the surveillance registers No.10 and 11 being maintained
in the Police Station, Sagar Pur and from other records on the ground that
on being enlisted, he is being treated as a bad character.
2. The necessary facts which gave rise to filing of the present petition are
that the petitioner claims himself to be a property dealer, who is residing
with his mother, wife, two daughters and a school going son, who are all
dependent upon him. It is claimed that the petitioner is leading a peaceful
and respectable life.
3. It is further submitted that no criminal case has been registered against the
petitioner for the last about 12 years and at present only one case stands
pending against him, which was registered under Section 308 IPC as a
cross-case in the year 2001 in relation to an ancestral property dispute.
4. During the period 1994 to 1997 the petitioner was falsely implicated in
three cases out of enmity 15 to 18 years ago by one Babu Ram, however,
the petitioner was acquitted in the three cases. A representation was made
by the petitioner on 22.8.2008 to the DCP, Vasant Vihar, South District,
bringing to his notice the acquittal in three cases out of four cases pending
against him; and a request was made that he be not treated as a bad
character of the area.
5. On 11.5.2012 petitioner received a notice directing him to visit the police
station for renewal of his dossier, as he was being treated as a bad
character of the area. Another representation was made by the petitioner
on 12.5.2012 bringing to the notice of the concerned SHO that he had
been leading a peaceful, happy and respectable life along with his family
for the past 11 years without any involvement in any case whatsoever and
out of four cases, he stood acquitted in three cases and only one case
arising out of property dispute, which was registered in the year 2001 is
pending. The petitioner sought recall of the order and proceedings by
which he was declared as a bad character of the area.
6. An identical representation was also made on 21.8.2012 to the concerned
DCP. On 15.11.2012 head constable Virender informed the petitioner
without any reason that he should visit the police station. Counsel for the
petitioner has placed reliance on rule 23.13 (4) of the Punjab Police Rules,
in support of his submission that a personal file of any person against
whom a history-sheet does not exist or such person has been of good
behaviour continuously for seven years, may be destroyed.
7. As per the status report which has been filed on record the petitioner was
previously involved in four criminal cases; the petitioner has been a
history-sheeter of P.S. Sagarpur, although his last involvement was in the
year 2001 in the case FIR No.101/2001 at P.S. Dabri, which case is
pending trial.
8. It is not in dispute that initially the petitioner was a history -sheeter, but
since the petitioner had no involvement in criminal case since the year
2001 and moreover petitioner stood acquitted in FIR no.361/1994 and FIR
No.1078/1997, on 15.2.2011 the history-sheet of the petitioner stood
transferred to Bundle-B. The status report categorically states that the
petitioner has no criminal involvement since the last 11 years and in fact
review process has been initiated for deleting the name of the petitioner
from the surveillance register and it is only for this reason that he was
served with a notice and not with a view to cause any harassment to him.
9. Counsel for the State points out that on 25.7.2013 the history-sheet of the
petitioner was reviewed and the name of the petitioner was transferred
from Bundle-B to personal file.
10. Since the status report itself suggests that the review process has been
initiated for deleting the name of the petitioner from the surveillance
register, and the fact that no fresh case has been filed against the petitioner
for the past 11 years, the case of the petitioner would be considered in
terms of Rule 23.13(4) of the Punjab Police Rules, within four weeks
from the date of receipt of this order.
11. Needless to say that the discretion vested is to be exercised judiciously
and in the light of the facts which have been noticed above.
12. The petition stands disposed of, in above terms.
G.S.SISTANI, J
NOVEMBER 27, 2013
ssn
