NANAK CHAND Vs. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Nanak Chand has by means of this writ petition sought the destruction of the history sheet pertaining to him and opened by the respondents with a further prayer that he should not be harassed by checking his presence at his house and calling him to police station at all times without any reasonable excuse. He has asserted that there were as many as nine criminal cases instituted against him out of which he was convicted only in two. He has further pointed out that two more criminal cases are pending trial against him. The details of these criminal cases find mention on pages 3 and 4 of the petition. These details show that he was acquitted in all the case s except the ones which are still pending against him and that be was convicted only in two cases and sentenced to pay fine to the tune of Rs.100/- in each case and in default to undergo imprisonment for 15 days.

(2.) In the reply affidavit deposed to by Inspector Didar Singh of Police Station Bara Hindu Rao it is stated that the history sheet of the petitioner in bundle A was opened on 4th December. 1973 where after the then Super intendent of Police (North) ordered that the name of the petitioner be entered in the Surveillance Register No. X Part II and there after he has been kept under direct surveillance. It is further stated in this affidavit that subsequently on 1st September 1977 the name of the petitioner was removed from the Surveillance Register No X Part II by the then Superintendent of Police, District North and the petitioner now is only B.C. of bundle B. A number of cases have been mentioned in this reply affidavit and these cases include the cases referred to by the petitioner in this petition. The perusal of these cases go to show that the petitioner was either acquitted or discharged in almost all the cases except three hot the conviction alleged in this affidavit in respect of the first case does not appear to be correct because the petitioner has asserted that in that case he was acquitted in appeal by the Additional Sessions Judge though he was convicted initially by the Magistrate. So, we are left only with two convictions to the credit of the petitioner.

(3.) It would be noted that the history sheet pertaining to the petitioner was opened on 4th December, 1973 whereas there was no conviction of the petitioner in any criminal case at that point of time and the conviction dated 27th May, 1971 in the first case was set aside in appeal by the Add I. Sessions Judge and the petitioner was acquitted there under. The next two cases were no doubt prior in point of time to the date of the opening of the history sheet i.e. 4th December 1973 as the F.I.R in those cases were registered on 9th July, 1973 and 23rd November, 1973, the convictions in those cases were recorded only in 1976 and 1975 respectively.