S.Saran Raj v. The Superintendent Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 29.11.2023 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN S.Saran Raj,

...Petitioner

-Vs1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District, TamilNadu-608 801.

2. The State, Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Sethiyathope Police Station, Bhuvanagiri Taluk, Cuddalore District-608 601.

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the Respondent pertains to the Impugned Order of the 1st Respondent dated 01.03.2022 bearing Reference No.01/JO Circle/2022 and quash the same, consequently direct the Respondents to remove the Petitioner's name from the ''History sheeted Pokkiri list'' register No.1 of 2016 maintained in the 2nd Respondent Police Station.

1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.P.R.Thiruneelakandan For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.A.Gopinath, Govt., Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the Respondent pertains to the Impugned Order of the 1st Respondent dated 01.03.2022 bearing Reference No.01/JO Circle/2022 and quash the same, consequently direct the Respondents to remove the Petitioner's name from the ''History sheeted Pokkiri list'' register No.1 of 2016 maintained in the 2nd Respondent Police Station.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner involved in so many cases, all the cases are happened till 2018. After the year 2018, no case has been registered as against the petitioner. Even then, wantonly the 2nd respondent included the name of the petitioner in the History Sheet.

2/4

3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submitted that this petitioner involved in 10 cases, out of which 4 cases are involved in the year 2023. The petitioner is the accused in Cr.No.56 of 2023 and Cr.No.180 of 2023 on the file of the 2nd respondent. Therefore, the 2nd respondent rejected the request made by the petitioner for removal of his name from the History Sheet.

4. Hence, this court cannot find any merits in this writ petition. As such, this writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 29.11.2023 Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No gvn 3/4

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,J.

gvn To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of the Superintendent of Police, Cuddalore, Cuddalore District, TamilNadu-608 801.

2. The Inspector of Police, Sethiyathope Police Station, Bhuvanagiri Taluk, Cuddalore District-608 601.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

29.11.2023 4/4