Ms. Manvi Gupta, Advocate v. STATE

$~30 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3536/2018 VIMLA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Manvi Gupta, Advocate. versus STATE .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari - ASC (Crl.) with Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA O R D E R % 15.12.2025 1. The Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner, Vimal for quashing of the History Sheet of the Petitioner as per the Police records of the Police Station Farsh Bazar and direct to remove the name of the Petitioner as a „Bad Character‟. 2. Brief facts are that vide Order dated 07.01.2004, the Hon‟ble Lieutenant Governor directed that the Petitioner shall suffer period of one year of externment outside the NCT of Delhi. Consequently, Additional DCP passed an Order dated 21.12.2005 for the removal of the Petitioner. 3. Additional DCP, again on 19.05.2016 passed an Order that the Petitioner was having a history of involvement in 32 Cases. Hon‟ble LG on 10.08.2016 upheld the Order of the Additional DCP. 4. The said Order was set-aside by this Court in W.P.(Crl.) 3245/2016, This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/12/2025 at 13:16:21 titled Vimal vs. State Government NCT of Delhi’ . 5. The grounds for seeking quashing of the name of the Petitioner I history sheet as „bad character‟ is that the introduction of the bad character of the accused, carries an undeniable threat of conviction, which is based purely on the previous misconduct. Conversely, the Petitioner has already been acquitted/discharged in all the Cases except one FIR No. 247/1993 under Section 61/1/14 of the Excise Act, registered on 16.09.1993 at Police Station Anand Vihar. She pleaded guilty in this FIR and was fined for Rs.1,000/-. 6. The evidence of reputation is admissible for the purpose of the establishing the good or the bad character. If the present title is not quashed at the earliest, it is assumed that the Petitioner is a habitual offender and it harms reputation for herself and also for her children. 7. The removal of the name of the Petitioner from the History Sheet of the Police Station, is of utmost important as the Police Officers have been constantly harassing the Petitioner either by coming to her house during the day at any time or by calling her frequently to the Police Station. The Police Officials have been intimidating the Petitioner every now and then by coming to her house. 8. Because of the constant threats, she had to call the records from the Police Station Farsh Bazar by filing an RTI dated 02.07.2018 wherein a Reply was given that there has been no cases registered against the Petitioner despite which she is facing continuous harassment. 9. She is law-abiding citizen and is a divorcee, who is maintaining her family by running a Provisional Store in her house. She is the sole bread earner of her family and one neighbor, Mr. Kamaljeet, who is inimically This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/12/2025 at 13:16:21 disposed towards her and has been instrumental in having the Petitioner implicated in some Criminal Cases. The FIR in the Criminal Cases have ended up in acquittal or discharge. There is no material on the basis of which, her name should still continue in the Police records. Moreover, the title of „bad character‟ is a serious encroachment on the Fundamental Rights. Hence, the Petition is filed for removal of her name from the Police record as „bad character‟. 10. Status Report has been filed on behalf of the State wherein it is submitted that the History Sheet was opened on 23.04.2005 by the Order of DCP East. She is a boot legger and Bad Character of Bundle „A‟ of Police Station Farsh Bazar. She is involved in total 33 Cases, as per the record of the Police Station Farsh Bazar. Because of being a habitual offender, an Externment Order was passed against her vide Order dated 22.12.2005 by Additional DCP, which was confirmed by the Hon‟ble LG. 11. Thereafter, also she has continued to be involved in criminal activities and was again directed to remove herself for a period of two years vide Order dated 19.05.2016 by the Additional DCP, which was affirmed by the Hon‟ble LG dated 10.08.2016. 12. The Petitioner has challenged the said two Orders in W.P. (Crl) 3245/2016, which has been allowed and the Orders dated 19.05.2016 and 10.08.2016, have been set-aside. 13. It is further submitted that as per the Standing Order No. 53/2009 “Maintenance of Surveillance Register (No. X) Entering/Deletion of Names Therein and opening of History Sheet/Personal Files” are being maintained and reviewed periodically. There is no specific time of downgrading the History Sheet in the Standing Order but as a practice, BC who is not This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/12/2025 at 13:16:21 involved in any crime during last five years, his History Sheet is to be downgraded. 14. The case of the Petitioner is still pending in the concerned Court for verdict. She is involved in three Cases in the year 2015 and therefore, she is kept under active surveillance. 15. Further, Status Report has been filed on behalf of the State on 06.10.2013 detailing that the subsequent Order of DCP dated 06.10.2023, has been filed wherein it was noted that five more Cases have registered against her in the year 2020. Submissions heard and the record perused. 16. Considering that there are no further cases registered after 2020, the Petition is disposed of with the directions to the Respondent, to review the Case of the Petitioner by taking into consideration that no more Cases after 2020, have been registered against her. The Order be passed within four weeks. In case, there is any grievance, the Petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh Petition. 17. Petition along with the pending Application, is disposed of accordingly. NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J DECEMBER 15, 2025/RS