Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 785 (MAD)

M. Ochu Balu v. Commissioner of Police, Madurai

2013-02-06

K.K.SASIDHARAN

body2013
Judgment :- 1. This writ petition, at the instance of a history sheeter, seeks a writ of Mandamus directing the Commissioner of Police, Madurai to review the case of the petitioner on the basis of his representation dated 02.07.2012 and delete his name from the history sheet maintained by Karimedu Police Station in the District of Madurai. 2. According to the petitioner, he was involved in four criminal cases and those cases were charged against him out of political vendetta. He was detained earlier and the order of detention was quashed by this Court as per order dated 25.11.2011 in H.C.P. (MD)No.738 of 2011. While so, his name was included in the history sheet maintained by the Karimedu Police Station, on account of the instruction given by the first respondent. Even though the petitioner submitted a representation on 02.07.2012 requesting the first respondent to review the matter, the issue was not considered. Non consideration of the representation, made the petitioner to file this writ petition. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents. 4. The question, as to whether the name of the petitioner should be removed from the history sheet maintained by the third respondent, is essentially, a matter to be considered by the first respondent. The first respondent is having jurisdiction to review the matter and in case after review he is of the opinion that it is not necessary to retain the name of the petitioner in the history sheet, it is open to him to pass appropriate orders. There is nothing on record to show that the first respondent has considered the representation of the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, there shall be a direction to the first respondent to review the case of the petitioner and to decide as to whether his name should be retained in the history sheet maintained by the third respondent. Such exercise shall be completed on or before 30.04.2013. It is made clear that I have not considered the merits of the matter and it is for the first respondent to consider the issue purely on merits and as per law. 6. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No Costs.