Ashok D vs The Commissioner of Police

Court
Madras High Court

WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 27-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI
WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
CNR:{HCMD010402322024}
Ashok D
S/o. Dharman,
No. 365/7, East Street,
Karumppalai,
Madurai 20
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Commissioner of Police
Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City.
2. The Inspector of Police (Crime)
Anna Nagar Police Station,
Madurai 20
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st
and 2nd respondents herein to delete the petitioner’s name in the history
sheet in H.S.No. 70/2003 maintaining by the 2nd respondent police based
on the petitioners representation dated 08.11.2023 and pass such further
or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
For Petitioner(s) :M/s.Mohamed Rafi M
For Respondent(s) :AMr.D.Rajaboopathy
Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)
__________
Page  1  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 03:43:33 pm )

WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the
respondents herein to close the History Sheet in H.S.No. 70 of 2003
pending against the petitioner, based on the petitioner's representation
dated 08.11.2023.
2. The petitioner has sent a representation on 08.11.2023 to the
respondents seeking to remove his name from the History Sheet No.70 of
2003. Since the same was not considered, this writ petition is filed.
3. The issue involved in this writ petition has already been dealt
with by the Madurai Bench of this Court and detailed order has been
passed in W.P.(MD)No.19651 of 2017 on 26.09.2018. On the basis of the
above said Order, the Director General Of Police, Chennai issued a
circular in Rc.No. 66569/Crime 3(2)/2019 dated 24.04.2019, which reads
as follows :-
“ 7. From the above judgments the following principles
emerge insofar as history sheeters are concerned:
a. In order to facilitate the study of crime and criminals,
the Police Standing Orders provides a mechanism, whereby
every Police Station shall maintain a crime history, which
shall be a confidential record. In this record all cases of crime
__________
Page  2  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 03:43:33 pm )

WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
that are mentioned in PSO No.742, which provides various
classes of crime, shall be entered and even an attempt to
commit those offences, are entered in the records maintained
in the Police Station.
b. These crime records maintained by the Various Police
Stations shall be reviewed every year by the Inspector of
Police of the concerned Police Station. On such review, the
Inspector of Police has to furnish a concise appreciation of
the year's crime for the benefit of the Superior Officers and
also to make suggestions in order to improve the quality of
crime control. The review undertaken by the Inspector of
Police is not merely a catalogue of the crime in the year. It
should reflect the valuable suggestions in order to prevent
such crimes in future and to provide ways and means of
handling serious offences in an effective manner.
c. History Sheet can be opened by the concerned Police
Station under two circumstances. The first circumstance is
provided under PSO No.746, which states that the history
sheet can be opened against a person who is a resident
(permanently or temporarily) within the station limit, who is
known or believed to be addicted to commission of crime,
whether convicted or not. Here the thrust is on the habituality
or the propensity to commit a crime by a person, which is
sought to be monitored by opening a history sheet.
d. The second category of persons against whom history
sheet can be opened are the persons, who are convicted for
various offences that has been listed in PSO No.747, wherein
opening of the history sheet is automatic.
e. In the first category of opening history sheet, month
__________
Page  3  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 03:43:33 pm )

WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
wise scrutiny or a close watch on the person concerned is
contemplated. Here also there is sub-categorization as, close
watch bad characters and non-close watch bad characters. In
the former, the entry shall be made month wise and in the
later, the entry shall be made once in a quarter. What is
entered is normally anything of interest in respect of the bad
character, which goes to the notice of the Police. These
records must be checked and brought up to date once in a
year. Here the main thrust is on "Current Doings".
f. In the second category of opening history sheet, a mere
act of conviction under the offences listed in PSO No.747 is
enough. The name of the persons, who have been convicted for
those offences can be retained for a period of two years after
their release from jail.
g. PSO No.748, is the most important provision, which
deals with discontinuance of history sheet. This provision is
common to both the categories falling under PSO Nos.746 and
747. As per PSO No.748, the Superintendent of Police may
order a closure of a history sheet at any time. But, the
Divisional Officer can order closure of history sheet only after
the expiry of the period stipulated in PSO No.747.
h. As per PSO 748, where retention of the history sheet
is considered to be necessary, even after two years of
registration, orders of an Officer of and above the rank of
Assistant Superintendent of Police/ Deputy Superintendent of
Police must be taken for extension for the first instance up to
the end of next December. For further annual extension from
January to December, separate orders must be passed every
time by an Officer of and above the rank of Assistant
__________
Page  4  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 03:43:33 pm )

WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
Superintendent of Police / Deputy Superintendent of Police.
This provision is made applicable even for rowdy sheeters.
i. For the purpose of passing such orders, there must be
valid materials available on record and it cannot be passed on
the whims and fancies of the Police Officers. Therefore, the
authority empowered to extend the period of retention of the
names of the persons in the history sheet, should record his
reasons based on both objective and subjective instructions.
j. Branding a person as a history sheeted rowdy, taints
the name and image of the person. It is true that the entire
purpose of maintaining a history sheet is to ensure public
peace. However, it should be balanced with the fundamental
right guaranteed to every citizen under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India. Therefore, a fair and reasonable
decision, based on the materials, with sufficient reasons,
becomes sine qua non to retain the name of a person as a
history sheeter beyond the period stipulated in the Police
Standing Orders.
k. This Court has time and again brought the above
principle to the notice of the Higher Police Officials and in
one of the judgments in Manivanan Vs. State represented by
The District Collector, Coimbatore District and Others,
reported in (2013) 7 MLJ 501, this Court felt that there is lack
of understanding on the part of the Police in maintaining
history sheet and therefore, directed the Director General of
Police to issue necessary instructions / guidelines / circulars
with regard to the manner in which it has to be maintained
and the manner in which the orders will have to be passed for
extension of the period to continue a person as a history
__________
Page  5  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 03:43:33 pm )

WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
sheeter.”
4. The above principles that have been culled out of various
decisions of this Court will now be applied to each case in order to see if
the Police officials have scrupulously followed all the Police Standing
Orders and the judgments of this Court, while retaining the name of a
person as a history sheeter, beyond the stipulated period.
5. In terms of the above circular passed by the Director General of
Police, Chennai, this Court directs the first respondent to consider the
petitioner's representation dated 08.11.2023 and pass orders, on merits
and in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
27-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
skn
__________
Page  6  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 03:43:33 pm )

WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
To
1. The Commissioner of Police
Commissioner of Police
Madurai City
2. The Inspector of Police (Crime)
Anna Nagar Police Station
Madurai 20
__________
Page  7  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 03:43:33 pm )

WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.
skn
WP(MD) No. 9196 of 2024
27-10-2026
__________
Page  8  of  8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/10/2026 03:43:33 pm )