Jammu and Kashmir High Court
WP(Crl)/16/2024 of VINAY VERMA Vs U T OF J AND K TH SSP JAMMU AND ANOTHER on 11 September 2026
OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU WP(Crl) No. 16/2024 CrlM No. 527/2024 Vinay Verma …..Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Satyam Arora, Advocate with Mr. Divyanshu Gupta, Advocate Vs UT of J&K and anr. …Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Sageera Jafar, Advocate vice Mrs. Monika
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
WP(Crl) No. 16/2024
CrlM No. 527/2024
Vinay Verma
…..Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Satyam Arora, Advocate with Mr. Divyanshu Gupta, Advocate
Vs
UT of J&K and anr.
…Respondent(s)
Through: Ms. Sageera Jafar, Advocate vice Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG
Coram:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAHZAD AZEEM, JUDGE
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
(11.09.2026)
1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken on board and heard finally.
2. The very short point raised in this petition is that the petitioner seeks that his name may be removed from the record pertaining to History Sheeter maintained by respondent No. 2 in view of the status report submitted by respondent No. 1 to Deputy Commissioner, Jammu and further seeks direction to remove his photograph from the history sheeter board installed at Police Station, Trikuta Nagar, Jammu.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this matter is squarely covered by the order dated 17.05.2018 passed by this Court in OWP No. 14/2018 titled Vinay Verma Vs. State and ors. in which following directions were passed:- S. No. 21
2 WP(Crl) No. 16/2024
“In view of the submissions made and in the facts of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to take action, if so advised, against the petitioner strictly in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Kharak Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh(supra)”
4. To the proposition put forth by learned counsel for the petitioner, no serious objection is raised by learned counsel for the respondents.
5. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of in terms of order dated 17.05.2018 by directing the respondents to take action, if so advised, against the petitioner strictly in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Kharak Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh; 1961 AIR SC 1295.
6. Disposed of.
(SHAHZAD AZEEM) JUDGE JAMMU
11.09.2026
Tarun/PS
Tarun Kumar Gupta 2026.09.14 14.36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document