SUNKARA SATYANARAYANA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Truck driver. He is in private service. He has been residing in Gudivada town of Krishna District eking out his livelihood by working as a lorry driver for the last two years. He has a family depending on him. In this writ petition he has prayed this Court for declaration that the action of the respondent in maintaining history sheet No. 615 in II town police station. Gudivada against the petitioner as illegal and unconstitutional and consequential direction to the respondents to close the history sheet of the petitioner.

(2.) The facts in this case are not in dispute. A crime was registered against the petitioner under Section 379 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (I.P.C. for short) in 1972 and also in 1976. In both the cases, he was convicted and sentenced to simple imprisonment. On conviction a K. D. Sheet (history sheet) No. 615 in II town police station, Gudivada was opened against him. The history sheet was opened by the third respondent under Police Standing Order (hereinafter referred to as PSO) 734 of the A. P. Police Standing Orders. According to the petitioner there are no cases against him since 1977, but the history sheet opened against him is being continued. It is also his case that there are no cases pending against him as on the date of filing of the writ petition and he is not habitual offender. He did not resort to any action, which resulted in breach of the peace in the society. The respondents continued the history sheet though there are no circumstances warranting opening or continuing the history sheet. The requirements of PSO 734 are not at all complied with. The petitioner further submits that as per PSO 735 where retention of history sheet is considered necessary after two years of the opening of the sheet, the order of a Gazetted Police Officer must be taken for the extention of the period in the first instance up to the end of next December, and for further annual extention from January to December of each subsequent year. The petitioner is also aggrieved that there is no valid review by the competent authority to decide as to whether the history sheet opened in 1972 is being continued for the last 27 years, which amounts to violation of right to equality and right to freedom and liberty guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court for appropriate orders and direction to the respondents to delete the name of the petitioner from the record of the 'station crime history'. After receiving notice before admission, the third respondent filed counter-affidavit and also produced the history sheet No. 615 of II town police station, Gudivada.

(3.) The counter-affidavit filed by the third respondent justifies the continuation of the history sheet No. 615 on the ground that the petitioner is a habitual offender. He was involved in several offences like theft, house-breaking. He was also bound over under Sections 109 and 110 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr. P. C. for short). Since 1971, the petitioner was involved in 11 crimes and that Cr. No. 60 of 1998 under Sections 324, 342, 506 r/w. 34, IPC is pending for trial. It is the case of the respondents that the petitioner was convicted in all the cases. Though the history sheet was opened in 1973, as the petitioner is a habitual offender, the history sheet was not closed. Nonetheless, the history sheet of the petitioner is being reviewed from time to time till December, 1998. The other allegations made by the petitioner are denied by the respondents.