Allowed

Brabeesh v. The Superintendent of Police

Madras HC24 Jan 2025WP(MD)/1859/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought removal of his name from a police history sheet after being acquitted in all pending cases. The Additional Public Prosecutor confirmed no cases were pending, and the court directed the third respondent to remove the petitioner's name within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to remove petitioner's name from History Sheet in H.S.No.67 of 2015 within two weeks; writ petition allowed without costs.

Brabeesh Vs The Superintendent of Police — Quashing and FIR | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.1859 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED:24.01.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.1859 of 2025

¶7

Brabeesh ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Superintendent of Police Kanyakumari Dsitrict at Nagercoil

¶10

The Deputy Superintendent of Police Marthandam Kanyakumari District

¶11

The Inspector of Police Nithravilai Police Station Kanyakumari District ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to remove the name of the petitioner from the record of history sheet within a stipulated period that may be fixed by this Court

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sivakumar For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar Additional Public Prosecutor

¶14

1/4

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.1859 of 2025

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking to remove his name from the history sheet in H.S.No.67 of 2015 maintained by the respondents.

¶19

2 . The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and after trial he was acquitted in all the pending cases. Therefore, the petitioner currently has no criminal cases pending against him and requests that his name be removed.

¶20

3 . The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that as of now no previous cases are pending against the petitioner. In view of the same, the petitioner's name will be removed from the history sheet.

¶21

4 . Considering the submissions, it is observed that, as of today, no criminal cases are pending against the petitioner. All the cases have either been dropped or quashed. In view of the same, the third respondent is directed to remove the petitioner's name from History

¶22

2/4

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

W.P.(MD)No.1859 of 2025

¶25

Sheet in H.S.No.67 of 2025, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶26

5 . With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No

¶27

costs.

¶28

24.01.2025

¶29

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No aav To

¶30

1.The Superintendent of Police Kanyakumari Dsitrict at Nagercoil

¶31

The Deputy Superintendent of Police Marthandam Kanyakumari District

¶32

The Inspector of Police Nithravilai Police Station Kanyakumari District

¶33

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶34

3/4

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

W.P.(MD)No.1859 of 2025

¶37

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

¶38

aav

¶39

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.1859 of 2025

¶40

Dated:24.01.2025

¶41

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Brabeesh v. The Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brabeesh v. The Superintendent of Police

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

Asiya Beevi Vs The Superintendent of Police

Chandran Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

S.Sivasubramaniyan Vs The Director General of Police

Jeyanthi Vs The Superintendent of Police

A.Karanthamalai Vs The State of Tamilnadu

V.Chinnaramu Vs The Superintendent of Police