HARISH CHAND SHARMA Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in accordance with Rule 4.9 of the Police Rules, the name should exist in the surveillance register for opening the history sheet of any person. It is claimed that the name of the petitioner does not exist in the said register and the history sheet has been opened because of the personal animosity with the S.H.O., Motidungry police station and other persons. It was imperative on the part of the respondent to have entered the name in the surveillance register. THE learned counsel for the respondent has submitted in their reply that the petitioner is a habitual offender. I have considered over, he matter. Order of the S.H.O., Police Station Moti Dungary for opening the history sheet of the petitioner is quashed. THE respondent would be free in case it is found that the petitioner is liable for opening of the history sheet in their record by entering the name first in the surveillance register. It is expected that no personal prejudices will be taken into consideration. THE writ petition is disposed of accordingly. A copy of this order may be sent to the Director General of Police. Petition allowed.