Disposed

B. Rajesh v. The Commissioner of Police

Madras HC20 Apr 2016WP/14105/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the Madras High Court directed the Assistant Commissioner of Police to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2016 and remove his name from the History Sheeted Rowdy List within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and remove his name from the history sheet within three weeks.

B. Rajesh Vs The Commissioner of Police — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 20.04.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA

¶5

W.P.No.14105 of 2016

¶6

B.Rajesh ... Petitioner

¶7

¶8

The Commissioner of Police, E.V.R. Road, Vepery, Chennai.

¶9

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Triplicane Range, O/o.Chintadaripet Police Station, Chintadaripet, Chennai.

¶10

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Nungambakkam, O/o.Nungambakkam Police Station, Chennai – 600 034.

¶11

The Inspector of Police (Law and Order), F-5 Choolaimedu Police Station, Choolaimedu, Chennai – 600 094. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer:- This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to remove the petitioner's name from the history sheet maintained by the 4^th respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2016 within the period stipulated by this Court.

¶13

The petitioner has come forward with this petition for issuance of writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to remove the petitioner's name from the history sheet maintained by the 4^th respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2016 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶14

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

¶15

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has given a representation on 24.02.2016 to remove his name from the History Sheeted Rowdy List. But the respondent police has neither deleted his name nor disposed of his representation. Hence, the above petition has been filed.

¶16

3.At this juncture, the learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that a direction may be given to the 3^rd respondent to consider the representation given by the petitioner within a stipulated time.

¶17

4.Considered the rival submissions made on both sides and perused the typed set of papers.

¶18

5.The petitioner was an accused in Crime No.1096 of 2007 on the file of the 4^th respondent for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 341, 302 r/w. 149 of IPC. Further, charge sheet has been laid, which was taken as S.C.No.289 of 2010 on the file of the learned VII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai and the petitioner was acquitted from the charges. Since, he belongs to rival political party, his name has been included in the History Sheeted Rowdy list. Now, the petitioner is the Deputy President of Aavin Milk Consumer Co-operative Society and he has not involved in any case. Hence, the petitioner has given a representation to the respondents on 24.03.2016 to remove his name from the History Sheeted Rowdy list maintained by the 4^th respondent, but the same is yet to be considered.

¶19

6.In such circumstances, I am of the view that it is a fit case for giving direction to the 3^rd respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner. Accordingly, the 3^rd respondent is directed to consider the representation given by the petitioner on 24.03.2016 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶20

7.In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs. Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶22

//True Copy//

¶23

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶24

cse

¶25

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

¶26

To
1. The Commissioner of Police,
E.V.R. Road, Vepery,
Chennai.
2. The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Triplicane Range,
O/o.Chintadaripet Police Station,
Chintadaripet, Chennai.
3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Nungambakkam,
O/o.Nungambakkam Police Station,
Chennai – 600 034.
4. The Inspector of Police (Law and Order),
F-5 Choolaimedu Police Station,
Choolaimedu, Chennai – 600 094.
+1cc to Mr.R.Murali, Advocate, S.R.No.24301
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.24526
W.P.No.14105 of 2016
RSY(CO)
CA(09/05/2016)

¶27

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

B. Rajesh v. The Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B. Rajesh v. The Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Malathi Vs the Inspector of Police

Saraswathi Vs the Inspector of Police

Kalaivanan Vs the Inspector of Police

A.G.Santhanam Vs State Rep by

Sri K.Ponmeena Shankar Vs R.Vijaya Bharathi

Dr.K.Kandasamy Vs Mahalakshmi Metal and