Lateef Khan vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:11567)
2025 Latest Caselaw 7801 Raj

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 7801 Raj
Judgement Date : 24 February, 2025

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Lateef Khan vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:11567) on 24 February, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2025:RJ-JD:11567]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                 S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 866/2025

 Lateef Khan S/o Shri Yasin Khan, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
 Imam Azam Road, Opp. Ganesh Dairy, Kabir Nagar, P.s.
 Soorsagar, Jodhpur
                                                                     ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
 1.      State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
 2.      Deputy Commissioner Of Police, Jodhpur West, Jodhpur
 3.      Sho, P.s. Soorsagar, Jodhpur West, Raj.
                                                                  ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Talmeez Ahmed
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, AGA



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

24/02/2025

1. This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has

been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

"That this petition may kindly be allowed and the order dated 21.01.2016 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur West along with entire proceedings pursuant thereto and also direct the respondent to strikeout the name of the petitioner from the history sheet maintained at the concerned police station Any other order which is just and proper in the facts and circumstances, of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner".

2. Brief facts of the case as placed before this Court by learned

counsel for the petitioner are that on 21.01.2016 the SHO,

P.S. Sursagar, Jodhpur West, upon the application received

from the Deputy Commissioner, Jodhpur West passed the

[2025:RJ-JD:11567] (2 of 5) [CRLMP-866/2025]

order, whereby the direction was given to open the history

sheet against the petitioner.

3. As per the communication dated 21.01.2016, the details of

cases registered against the petitioner are as under:

Sr. No FIR No. & Date Section Police Station Judgment/ Order

1. No. 53/17.03.2010 323, 341, 325/34 of Sursagar Compromise IPC

2. No.144/01.04.2010 341, 323/34 of IPC Pratapnagar Sentence

3. No. 70/29.04.2010 143, 341, 323 of Sursagar Compromise IPC & Acquittal

4. No. 377/09.08.2010 143, 341, 323, 307, Pratapnagar Acquittal 384 of IPC vide order dated 03.12.2019

5. No. 50/27.01.2011 143, 447, 427, 379 Pratapnagar Acquittal of IPC

6. No. 160/26.06.2013 447, 427 of IPC Sursagar Compromise & Acquittal

7. No. 163/30.06.2013 143 , 354B, 452, Sursagar Compromise 323 of IPC & Acquittal

8. No.550/03.11.2013 323, 341 of IPC Pratapnagar Compromise

9. No.06/13.01.2015 147, 148, 149, Sursagar Acquittal 341, 323, 307/34 vide order dated 17.01.2024

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that as

per Rule 4.9 of the Rules 1965, the concerned officer should

have reasonable belief that a person is habitually addicted to

crime or to be aider or abettor; the petitioner does not even

fall under the category of Habitual Offender.

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the aforesaid

submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and submitted

that the petitioner was declared as the history-sheeter,

which is valid in eye of the law and the concerned

Superintendent of Police came to such conclusion, after duly

[2025:RJ-JD:11567] (3 of 5) [CRLMP-866/2025]

looking into the overall facts and circumstances of the

present case and the material available before him.

6. Heard learned counsel for both parties as well as perused the

record of the case.

7. This Court, in the case of Sanjay Vs. State And Ors. (S.B.

Criminal Misc. Petition No. 792/2016 and Other

connected matter) decided on 23.01.2023, as also in the

case of Rakesh Alias Rekhraj Vs. State of Rajasthan

(S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 6584/2022) decided

on 23.01.2023, which were also pertaining to opening of the

history-sheet, observed as under:-

11. While considering Rules 4.4 and 4.9 of the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965 as well as the judgment cited, this Court observes that for sustaining a history-sheet against a person, either a person has to have three cases of convictions which would bring him within the domain of the definition of "Habitual Offender" so that he could be declared as a history-

sheeter, by entering his name in the surveillance register, or as per Rule 4.9 of the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965, it is also stated that anything reasonable could be the criteria for determination of entering a person's name in the surveillance register, as per his being habitual to commit crime. 11.1 For the sake of brevity, this Court arrives at the following uniform criteria to determine whether an entry of a person's name in the surveillance register is justified:

(a) A person having three consecutive convictions against him, and being a habitual offender, shall be liable for continuance of entry of his name in the surveillance register, while declaring him as a history-sheeter; however, if the convictions are 15 years or before, then the history sheet/entry of his

[2025:RJ-JD:11567] (4 of 5) [CRLMP-866/2025]

name in the surveillance register will not fall in this criteria of sustenance.

OR

(b) If a person is having more than ten cases against him, in totality, irrespective of the result, his name, at the discretion of the concerned authority, entered in the surveillanc eregister, while declaring him as a history-sheeter, is justified and deserves continuance; but if a person is having more than ten cases and all of them are 10 years old, then the history sheet/entry of his name in the surveillance register, will not fall in this criteria of sustenance.

11.2 As an upshot of the above, this Court observes that a history-sheet shall be amenable to judicial scrutiny as above, and thus, while keeping into consideration Rule 4.4and Rule 4.9 of the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965 and the precedent law, this Court is of the opinion that the entry of a person's name in the surveillance register/history sheet, on count of his being a habitual offender, shall not be interfered with, if there are three consecutive convictions against such person, or such an entry in the history sheet/surveillance register shall not be interfered with, if a person is having more than 10 cases, in totality, against him, irrespective of the result. (The condition of 10 cases shall not apply, if there are no cases in last 10 years; similarly, if the convictions are 15 years or before, then again the exclusion of the person's name from the history sheet/surveillance register shall be warranted).

8. 11.3 This Court thus observes that if a person suffers from

any of the above disqualifications, then he shall be

disentitled from claiming relief against being declared as a

history-sheeter. It is relevant to note that in Diwan

Singh(supra), while granting relief to the petitioner therein,

[2025:RJ-JD:11567] (5 of 5) [CRLMP-866/2025]

it was observed that the petitioner therein was a senior

citizen against whom the last conviction was in the year

2003, and the last case registered against him was in the

year 2007, while his case had come up for final adjudication

in the year 2022.

9. Thus, this Court, in the light of the judgment rendered in