← Library
Madras High CourtWP/7989/2024disposed of

C.Babu@Kuruvibabu v. The Assistant Commissioenr Of Police,

2024-03-22Honourable Mr Justice C.V. Karthikeyan5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.03.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P.No.7989 of 2024 in W.M.P.No.8960 of 2024 C.Babu @ Kuruvibabu .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Annadhanapatty, Salem District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Annadhanapatty Police Station, Annadhanapatty, Salem District.

.. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to remove the petitioner's name from the rowdy list in H.S.No.525 of 2001 maintaining by the 2nd respondent in the 2nd respondent police station. For Petitioner .. Mr.C. Prakasam For Respondents .. Mr.A.Gopinath, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side)

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed in the nature of Mandamus seeking a direction to remove the name of the petitioner from the rowdy list. 2.The petitioner had been categorized as a history sheeter in H.S.No.525 of 2001 maintained by the 2nd respondent, the Inspector of Police, Annadhanapatty Police Station at Salem. 3.The grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the said history sheeter file was opened in the year 2001 and it is claimed that till 2019 there were no cases at all registered against the petitioner. But thereafter, a string of cases had been registered against the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner had been targeted by the 2nd respondent and cases have been foisted against him. The petitioner wants to reform but the registration of these cases make it impossible for him to turn around in society.

4.Taking all the factors into consideration, a direction is given to the 1st respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Annadhanapatty, Salem District, to consider the representation dated 12.03.2024 and in this

regard, the 1st respondent may call for records from the 2nd respondent and also if required, examine the circumstances surrounding the petitioner herein and thereafter, take a considered decision about the disposal of the representation. It would be in the interest of all that the 1st respondent endeavours to dispose of the said representation within a period of eight weeks.

5.I am informed that, in this connection, that there are also directions issued in Sabari @ Sabarigir Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Police, Anna Nagar, (L&O) Range, Madurai City, Madurai and others reported in 2018 4 MLJ Crl 585 and in Thirumurugan and Another Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai, reported in 2020 2 LW Crl 266. They may be instructive for the 1st respondent to dispose of the said representation.

6.Observing as above, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition stands closed. 22.03.2024 smv Index:Yes/No

Speaking order:Yes/No C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

smv To 1.The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Annadhanapatty, Salem District.

2.The Inspector of Police, Annadhanapatty Police Station, Annadhanapatty, Salem District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

W.P.No.7989 of 2024

22.03.2024