Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Hanumana Ram vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:35691) on 11 August, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:35691]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5025/2025
Hanumana Ram S/o Shri Surja Ram, Aged About 42 Years,
Resident Of Tehandesar, Tehsil Bidasar, District Churu.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Pp
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Churu
3. Station House Officer, Police Station Sandwa, District
Churu.
4. Station House Officer, Police Station Bidasar, District
Churu
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 753/2024
Hanumana Ram S/o Shri Surja Ram, Aged About 41 Years, R/o
Tehandesar, Tehsil Bidasar, District Churu.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. The Superintendent Of Police, Churu
3. Station House Officer, Police Station Sandwa, District
Churu.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jai Kishan for Mr. RS Choudhary.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh, PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Judgment / Order
11/08/2025
In S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 753/2024 :-
1. This criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS (Section
482 of Cr.P.C.) has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:-
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 10:39:36 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35691] (2 of 6) [CRLMP-5025/2025]
“It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully
prayed that this misc. petition may kindly be allowed
and impugned order dated 26.08.2022 passed by
Superintendent of Police, Churu may kindly be
quashed and set aside
Any other appropriate order or direction which
this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may kindly
be passed in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on
26.08.2022, the Superintendent of Police, Churu, issued a letter
directing the Station House Officer to open a History-Sheeter
register, enter the petitioner’s name in the register of habitual
offenders, keep him under surveillance and upload the data on the
police website.
3. The details of cases registered against the petitioner are as
under:-
SI No. FIR Offence U/s Police Decision/
No./Date Station Result
1. 74/11.10.20 395, 326, 397, Jamba, Acquitted on
02 142 of IPC District 21.09.2016
Jodhpur
2. 207/04.08.2 323, 354, 427, Gangashahar Acquitted on the
007 147 and 149 of District basis of
IPC Bikaner compromise on
25.11.2016
3. 01/01.01.20 143, 427, 307, Sujangarh, FR No.122
12 447, Section 3 District Churu dated
SC/ST Act and 08.10.2013
Section 3/25 of accepted on
Arms Act. 26.05.2014
4. 131/24.07.2 302, 147 of IPC Bichhwal, Pending before
014 and 3/25 of District the Court.
Arms Act Bikaner
5. 25/11.03.20 307, 323, 325, Bidasar, Acquitted on
16 452, 427, 147, District Churu 30.01.2017 by
148 and 149 of giving benefit of
IPC doubt
6. 129/13.06.2 42 and 43 of Bichhwal, Pending before
017 the Prisons Act, District the Court
1894. Bikaner
7. 10/16.02.20 387 and 143 of Bidasar, Pending before
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 10:39:36 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35691] (3 of 6) [CRLMP-5025/2025]
18 IPC District Churu the Court
8. 39/19.04.20 323, 341, 427, Jasrasar, Pending before
19 325 and 34 of District the Court
IPC Bikaner
9. 101/01.08.2 384, 386, 387, Bidasar, Pending before
020 506 and 143 of District Churu the Court
IPC
10. 31/26.04.20 420, 467, 468, Bidasar, Pending before
19 471 and 120B of District Churu the Court
IPC
11 64/22.04.20 420 and 406 of Sandwa, Pending before
22 IPC District Churu the Court
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
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. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor 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
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 10:39:36 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35691] (4 of 6) [CRLMP-5025/2025]
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.
7. Heard learned counsel for both the parties at Bar as well as
perused the record of the case.
8. 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:-
“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.
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 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 surveillance
register, while declaring hima 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.
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 10:39:36 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35691] (5 of 6) [CRLMP-5025/2025]
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
name from the history sheet/surveillance register shall be
warranted).
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.
9. 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 26.08.2022 passed by the Superintendent
of Police, Churu 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.
10. Stay petition as well as all the pending applications stand
disposed of.
In S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5025/2025:-
1. This criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS (Section
482 of Cr.P.C.) has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:-
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 10:39:36 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:35691] (6 of 6) [CRLMP-5025/2025]
“It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully
prayed that this misc. petition may kindly be allowed
and impugned notice dated 17.04.2025 issued by the
respondent No.3 may kindly be quashed and set aside
Any other appropriate order or direction which
this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may kindly
be passed in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the
stay order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in S.B.
Criminal Misc. Petition No. 753/2024, the impugned notice dated
17.04.2025 was issued against the petitioner.
3. In view of the detailed order passed in S.B. Criminal Misc.
Petition No.753/2024, the instant petition is allowed. The
impugned notice dated 17.04.2025 is hereby quashed and set
aside.
4. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
68-69-Jitender
(Downloaded on 15/08/2025 at 10:39:36 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)