Disposed

R. Parmban Arulraj, v. the District Collector

Madras HC23 Apr 2013WP(MD)/4934/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A history sheeted petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to remove his name from a police history sheet. The Court directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police to review the case within two years to decide on its retention, as per Police Standing Order No. 748.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police to review the case and decide on the retention of the petitioner's name in the history sheet on or before 24 June, 2013.

R. Parmban Arulraj, Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 23 . 04.2013

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.4934 of 2013

¶7

R.Parmban Arulraj : Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil.

¶10

2.The District Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil. 3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Colochel, Kanyakumari District.

¶11

4.The Inspector of Police, Karungal Police Station, Kanyakumari District. : Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the fourth respondent to remove the petitioner's name from the history sheet.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.M.R.Sreenivasan For Respondents : Mr.Aaiyram K.Selvakumar Government Advocate

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This Writ Petition, at the instance of a history sheeter, seeks a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Inspector of Police, Kanyakumari District, to remove his name from the history sheet maintained by Karungal Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

¶16

The fourth respondent registered criminal case against the petitioner long back. The name of the petitioner was included in the history sheet maintained by Karungal Police Station. The petitioner wanted his name to be removed from the history sheet and it was for the said purpose, he has preferred this Writ Petition.

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

¶19

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶20

Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶21

Sub-clause 2 of the Police Standing Order No.748 provides that in

¶22

case retention of a history sheet is considered necessary after two years of registration, orders of an officer, above the rank of Assistant Superintendent of Police/Deputy Superintendent of Police, must be taken. Therefore, it is clear that the review of the case is necessary, in case the history sheet should be retained for more than two years.

¶23

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, is

¶24

directed to review the case of the petitioner and to decide as to whether his name should be retained in the history sheet. Such exercise shall be completed, on or before 24 June, 2013.

¶25

The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No

costs.

Sd/-

Deputy Registrar

/True Copy/

Assistant Registrar

1.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil.

¶33

2.The District Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil.

¶34

3.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Colochel,

¶35

Kanyakumari District.

¶36

4.The Inspector of Police, Karungal Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

¶37

+1cc to Mr.M.R.Sreenivasan Advocate, Sr.No.23470 ssm AA/06.06.2013/2p-6c/

¶38

W.P.(MD)No.4934 of 2013 23.04.2013

¶39

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R. Parmban Arulraj, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. Parmban Arulraj, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Godwin, Vs the Branch Manager

M. Mahaboob Ali, Vs Tamil Nadu Wakf Board

G. Gunasekaran, Vs the Assistant Engineer

M.Rajesh, Vs the District Collector

R. Thirapathi, Vs State Rep. by

V. Baskaran, Vs the Branch Manager