Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Mahendra @ Banti vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:16385) on 27 March, 2025
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2025:RJ-JD:16385]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2570/2025
Mahendra @ Banti S/o Bhakraram Vishnoi, Aged About 40 Years,
R/o Jaleli Fojdar, P.s. Dangiyaswas, Dist. Jodhpur,raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. The Station House Officer, Dangiyawas, Dist. Jodhpur
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashok Khillery
For Respondent(s) : Mr. VS Rajpurohit, Dy.G.A.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
27/03/2025
1. This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has
been preferred claiming the following reliefs:
“(A) The record of the police in relation to the
petitioner may kindly be summoned.
(B) The letter dated 14.03.2014 issued by the
Respondent No.1 should be quashed and set aside.
(C) The respondents may kindly be restrained from
initiating history sheet proceeding against the
petitioner and also restrained from adding the name
of the petitioner in the Surveillance register.”
2. Brief facts of the case as placed before this Court by learned
counsel for the petitioner are that on 23.01.2014, the SHO, Police
Station Dangiyawas, District Jodhpur sent a letter to grant
permission to open history-sheet of the petitioner pursuant to
total 17 cases pending against him at that time. The Deputy
Commissioner of Police, upon receipt of the aforesaid application,
passed the impugned order dated 14.03.2014, whereby
(Downloaded on 18/04/2025 at 09:54:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:16385] (2 of 7) [CRLMP-2570/2025]
permission was granted to open history sheet against the
petitioner.
3. The details of cases registered against the petitioner are as
under:
Sl. Case Police Result of Decision/
No. Number/Date Station Police Result
/Sections
1. 419/27.12.200 Pratapnagar Charge Pending Trial
6 Sections 41 Sheet
and 23 of IPC No.12/27.0
1.2007
2. 64/21.06.2008 Kherapa Charge Pending Trial
Section 406 of Sheet
IPC No.9/28.09.
2008
3. 336/10.12.200 Chopasani Charge Pending Trial
8 Section 489 Housing Sheet
ABC IPC and Board
3/25 of Arms
Act
4. 437/11.12.200 Pratapnagar Charge Convicted vide
8 Section 8/8 of Sheet judgment dated
NDPS Act No.156/14. 12.12.2015
05.2009
5. 115/22.04.200 Ratanada Charge Pending Trial
9 Section 309 Sheet
of IPC No.87/30.0
4.2009
6. 425/21.11.201 Udaimandir Charge Pending Trial
1 Section 224 Sheet
of IPC No.77/13.0
3.2013
7. 159/01.11.201 Luni Charge Pending Trial
2 Sections 323, Sheet
353, 307 and No.20/24.0
120B of IPC 4.2014
8. 188/01.11.201 Dangiyawas Charge Acquitted vide
2 Sections 8/15 Sheet judgment dated
NDPS Act No.36/24.0 dated
4.2013 31.05.2017
36A/31.12.
2013
9. 122/13.05.201 Ratanada Charge Pending Trial
3 Sections 3/25 Sheet
(Downloaded on 18/04/2025 at 09:54:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:16385] (3 of 7) [CRLMP-2570/2025]
of Arms Act No.96/30.0
5.2013
10. 246/14.05.201 Pratapnagar Charge Pending Trial
3 Sections 79, Sheet
411, 420, 467, No.351/18.
468, 471, 482 03.2013
and 120B of
IPC
11. 71/01.06.2013 Luni Charge Pending Trial
Sections 32, Sheet
353, 224 and No.04/01.0
120 B of IPC 1.2014
12. 154/24.10.201 Dangiyawas Charge Pending Trial
3 Sections 07, Sheet
353, 120 B of No.09/14.0
IPC and 3 PDPP 3.2014
Act
13. 252/24.10.201 Ratanada Charge Pending Trial
3 Sections 332, Sheet
35 of IPC No.139/30.
05.2014
14. 253/24.10.201 Ratanada Charge Pending Trial
3 Sections 332, Sheet
353 and 307 of No.140/30.
IPC 05.2014
15. 542/26.10.200 Pratapnagar Charge Pending Trial
1 of Sections Sheet
147, 148, 149, No.82/16.0
307 of IPC and 4.2014
3/25 of Arms
Act
16. 114/14.12.201 Dangiyawas Charge Pending Trial
7 Sections 341, Sheet
323, 27, 427, No.113/30.
379 and 143 of 11.2018
IPC
17. 67/15.07.2020 Nikumbh Charge Pending Trial
Sections 8/15 Chittorgarh Sheet
of NDPS Act No.10/04.0
2.2021
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per Rule
4.4 and Rule 4.9 of the Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965, the history-
sheet can be opened if the name of a person is entered in the
(Downloaded on 18/04/2025 at 09:54:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:16385] (4 of 7) [CRLMP-2570/2025]
surveillance Register and if person falls under the essential
ingredients provided in Rajasthan Police Rules, 1965 (hereinafter
to be referred as ‘the Rules of 1965’) as well as definition of the
Habitual offender under the Rajasthan Habitual Offenders Act,
1953. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, the present
petitioner is not falling under the definition of Habitual offender
and also does not fall under the Rule 4.4 and Rule 4.9 of the Rules
of 1965.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that as
per Rule 4.9 of the Rules of 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.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out total 17
cases registered against the petitioner, he has been acquitted in 1
case, in 1 case, he has been convicted and 15 cases are pending
trial. The reason for high number of cases is dispute of the
petitioner with his relatives, due to which false cases were lodged.
The petitioner is not a habitual offender and last case was
registered against him in the year 2020.
7. On the other hand, learned Dy.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 looking into the overall facts and
circumstances of the present case and the material available
before him.
(Downloaded on 18/04/2025 at 09:54:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:16385] (5 of 7) [CRLMP-2570/2025]
8. Heard learned counsel for both parties as well as perused the
record of the case.
9. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, in the case of Sanjay Vs.
State of Rajasthan and Ors. (S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition
No.792/2016) along with other connected matters 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(Downloaded on 18/04/2025 at 09:54:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:16385] (6 of 7) [CRLMP-2570/2025]declaring him as a history-sheeter; however, if
the convictions are 15 years or before, then the
history sheet/entry of his 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
(Downloaded on 18/04/2025 at 09:54:35 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:16385] (7 of 7) [CRLMP-2570/2025]
name from the history sheet/surveillance
register shall be warranted).
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, 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.
10. In the case at hand, the petitioner has been convicted in only
one case registered against him; out of 17 cases registered, he
has been acquitted in 1 case; 14 cases are pending trial; the last
case was registered against him in the year 2017. Thus, this
Court, in the light of the judgments rendered in Sanjay (supra)
and Rakesh Alias Rekhraj (supra), allows the instant petition;
accordingly, while quashing and setting aside the impugned order
dated 14.03.2014 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Jodhpur
East along with entire proceedings pursuant thereto, the
respondents are directed to strike out the name of the petitioner
from the history-sheet maintained at the concerned police station.
11. All the pending applications stand disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J
323-divya/-
(Downloaded on 18/04/2025 at 09:54:35 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)