Rajasthan High Court
Kamaldeep @ Kamal Meena S/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan Through Pp on 3 March, 2023
Bench: Vinod Kumar Bharwani
[2023/RJJP/003547]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6778/2018
Kamaldeep @ Kamal Meena S/o Shri Banshidhar Meena, Aged
About 39 Years, R/o Ward No 1 Pareek Mohalla Sirsi Ps
Bhankrota Jaipur Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Raj.
2. The Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur Raj.
3. The Deputy Commissioner Of Police, Jaipur (West)
4. Sho Ps Bagru, Jaipur West
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kamaldeep, petitioner is present
in person
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahendra Meena, Public
Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI
ORDER RESERVED ON :- 01/03/2023
ORDER PRONOUNCED ON :- 03/03/2023
1. The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the petitioner laying
challenge to the order dated 31.03.2011 passed by the Deputy
Commissioner of Police, Jaipur (West), whereby history-sheet of
the petitioner was opened at Police Station Bagru (West), Jaipur
with a direction to keep surveillance on his activities.
2. It was contended by the petitioner, who was present in
person, that the petitioner did not fall within the definition of
habitual offender. It was also contended that the petitioner
sought information regarding the cases, which were registered
[2023/RJJP/003547] (2 of 4) [CRLMP-6778/2018]
against him under the Right to Information Act, 2005, in reply to
which, he received a list of cases, which has been placed on
record as Annexure-2, wherein as many as 23 cases have been
shown against him. It was further contended that the petitioner
was acquitted in all these cases except one, in which he was
bound to maintain peace and tranquility for a period of two years
and no sentence was awarded against the petitioner. It was also
contended that as per definition of habitual offender, the petitioner
was not sentenced on conviction on three occasions during any
continuous period of five years and, therefore, opening of history
sheet against the petitioner is bad in the eyes of law.
3. The petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of a
coordinate Bench of this Court at Jodhpur rendered in the case of
Diwan Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & ors. [S.B. Criminal
Misc. (Pet) No. 1305/2016) decided on 19.09.2022.
4. Despite granting opportunity, no reply to the misc. petition
has been filed by the respondent - State.
5. During the course of arguments, learned Public prosecutor
has placed on record the copy of the Letter dated 28.02.2023
along with criminal antecedents of the petitioner, as sent by the
S.H.O. Police Station Bindayka, Jaipur West and contended that
there were 25 criminal cases registered against the petitioner, out
of which one criminal case was pending trial. The petitioner was
convicted in one criminal case and in another case, he was bound
for maintaining peace for a period of two years. Further, it was
contended that looking to criminal activities of the petitioner,
history-sheet was opened and a direction was also issued for
keeping the petitioner on surveillance. The petitioner's activities
[2023/RJJP/003547] (3 of 4) [CRLMP-6778/2018]
come in the purview of Rajasthan Habitual Offenders Act. It was
argued that even during the pendency of the history-sheet against
the petitioner, other criminal cases were registered against him
between the year 2013 to 2018. However, learned Public
Prosecutor fairly conceded that in all those criminal cases
registered against the petitioner, the trial court passed the final
judgment except one case. The petitioner was convicted in two
cases but he was not sentenced on conviction.
6. I have considered the submissions and perused the material
available on record.
7. Section 2-A of the Rajasthan Habitual Offenders Act, 1953
defines a "habitual offender". The definition is quoted as under:-
"habitual offender" means a person who, during
any continuous period of five years, whether
before or after the 15th day of September, 1952
or partly before and partly after the said day, has
been sentenced on conviction on not less than
three occasions since he attained the age of
eighteen years to a substantive terms of
imprisonment for any one or occasions and not so
connected together as to form parts of the same
transaction, such sentence not having been
reversed in appeal or revision:
Provided that in computing the continuous period
of five years referred to above any period spent in
jail either under a sentence of imprisonment or
under detention shall not be taken into account];"
8. A perusal of the documents placed on record more
particularly the list of criminal antecedents, shows that the
petitioner was convicted and penalty was imposed against him in
connection with FIR No. 57/2014 dated 12.02.2014, whereas, he
was bound for a period of two years in connection with FIR
No.256/2010 dated 15.05.2010, however, there is no list of three
[2023/RJJP/003547] (4 of 4) [CRLMP-6778/2018]
conviction prior to 2011 and, therefore, the petitioner cannot be
considered to be a habitual offender in terms of the definition of
habitual offender given under the Act.
9. In the case of Diwan Singh (supra), a coordinate Bench of
this Court at Jodhpur has quashed the proceedings as the
petitioner did not fall in the definition of habitual offender..
10. In the instant case, the respondent-State is not able to
establish that the petitioner has been sentenced on conviction on
three occasions during any continuous period of five years.
Therefore, the order vide which the petitioner has been declared
as a history-sheeter is liable to be quashed and set aside.
11. In view of the above, the present misc. petition is allowed.
The impugned order dated 31.03.2011 is set aside and the Deputy
Commissioner of Police (West), Jaipur as well as SHO, Police
Station Bagru (West), Jaipur are directed to remove name of the
petitioner from the history-sheet/Surveillance Register of the
Police Station Bagru (West), Jaipur.
12. All pending applications stand disposed of accordingly.
(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J
SAHIL SONI/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
