S.Gopinath vs The Superintendent of Police

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 28-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN
THILAKAVADI
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011486822026}
S.Gopinath
..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Superintendent of Police
O/o.The Superintendent of Police,
Trichy District,
Trichy-620 021.
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
O/.The Deputy Superintendent of Police,
Musiri Taluk,
Musiri,
Trichy District.
3. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By The Inspector Of
Police, Musiri
Police Station,
Trichy District.
..Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
st
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1
nd
and 2 respondents to consider the representation, dated 28.09.2026 and
rd
further directing 3 respondent herein to remove the name of the
petitioner from the list of history sheeted rowdy in H.S No: 248 of 2022
rd
maintained by 3 respondent police station and pass such further or other
orders as this Court.
__________
Page 1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 09:56:27 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
For Petitioner :Mr.B.Vetrivel
For Respondents :Mr.D.Rajaboopathy
Counsel for State of Tamil Nadu
(Crl. Side)
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the
respondents 1 and 2 to consider the representation, dated 28.09.2026 and
rd
further directing 3 respondent herein to remove the name of the
petitioner from the list of history sheeted rowdy in H.S No:248 of 2022
rd
maintained by 3 respondent police station.
2. The petitioner has sent a representation on 28.09.2026 to the
respondents seeking to remove his name from the History Sheet No.248
of 2022. 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 :-
__________
Page 2 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 09:56:27 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
“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 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
__________
Page 3 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 09:56:27 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
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
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
__________
Page 4 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 09:56:27 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
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 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
__________
Page 5 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 09:56:27 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
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 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 3rd respondent to consider the
petitioner’s representation dated 28.09.2026 and pass orders, on merits
and in accordance with law, within a period of six (6) weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order.
__________
Page 6 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 09:56:27 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
6. With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
28-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
BTR
__________
Page 7 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 09:56:27 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
To
1. The Superintendent of Police
O/o.The Superintendent of Police
Trichy District
Trichy-620 021
2. The Deputy Superintendent of Police
O/.The Deputy Superintendent of Police
Musiri Taluk
Musiri
Trichy District
3. The Inspector Of Police, Musiri
Police Station
Trichy District
4. The Additional Public Prosecutor
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Madurai
__________
Page 8 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 09:56:27 pm )

WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.
BTR
WP Crl.(MD) No. 5836 of 2026
28-10-2026
__________
Page 9 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 09:56:27 pm )