SANJAY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the bone of contention in the present case is common, namely, the order(s) of the concerned Superintendent of Police, regarding opening of the History-sheet/entry of the name in the surveillance register, alongwith the entire proceedings pursuant thereto, against the present petitioners, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to set out the prayer clauses and the factual matrix of the cases individually, as pleaded in the respective petition, as under:

(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the Superintendent of Police has not followed the procedure provided in the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1958; Rule 4.4 thereof provides for the procedure for maintaining the surveillance register as well as maintaining record of the person, who was convicted twice and more than twice; Rule 4.9 thereof clearly provides that a history sheet may be opened by, or under the written orderes of, a police officer not below the rank of Inspector for any person not entered in the surveillance register who is reasonably believed to be habitually addicted to crime or to be an aider or abettor; and therefore the petitioners do not fall under this category.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners also submitted that as per the definition of the term "habitual offender" contained in the Habitual Offenders Act, 1953, "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 occasion since he attained the age of eighteen years to a substantive term of imprisonment for any one or more of the scheduled offences committed on different occasions and not so connected together as to form parts of the same transaction, such sentence not having been reversed in appeal or revision. The proviso added under the said definition says 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.