JUDGMENT
V.A. Mohta
1. An unusual relief is sought in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The relief is for the return of petitioner’s photographs taken by respondent No. 1 – Senior Inspector, Shivajinagar Police Station, Govandi, Bombay and for directing respondent No. 1 to delete the petitioner’s name from the register of habitual criminals maintained by the police station.
2. Respondent No. 1 has not disputed the factum of taking the petitioner’s photographs but has denied that the name of the petitioner was placed in the register of habitual criminals. The petitioner’s name was included in the register of bad characters maintained under Standing Order No. 141 issued by the Govandi Police Station, Bombay for the purposes of organising a systematic surveillance and follow up action if necessary against them. On 21st September, 1993 new Shivajinagar Police Station came into existence whereupon the areas of Govandi and Shivajinagar which were formerly under jurisdiction of Deonar Police Station came under the jurisdiction of new Police Station. Deonor Police Station had forwarded to the new Police Station all its records pertaining to the carved out area and on that basis fresh record for the new Police Station was being prepared. The name of the petitioner was forwarded by Deonar Police Station as a bad character but not his photographs and hence a request was made to the petitioner to furnish the photgraphs for being affixed in the register be maintained under Standing Order No. 141.
3. Under Standing Order No. 118 issued by the Commissioner of Bombay, Mavali register is maintained in which it is incorporated the name, record and photograph of habitual criminals. It was considered necessary to issue Standing Order No. 141 in addition to Standing Order No. 118 in order to put down goondaism and to have an effective control over the activities of bad characters as it was necessary to organise a systematic surveillance and follow up action against them. Standing Order No. 141 defines for its own purpose a “bad character”. Bad Characters are classified in various categories. They include even persons who have no ostensible and legal means of livelihood. The beat staff and the surveillance staff attached to the Police Station is expected to be conversant to the bad characters living in the beat. Standing Order provides for inspection of the list of bad characters and their dossier at least once in three months by the A.C.Ps. and once in six months by the D.C.Ps.
4. This register is strictly confidential and is meant only for the use of the Police administration for various objects indicated in the Standing Order. Maintenance of such register is in public interest. This is purely an administrative discretionary decision of those on whom it lies the responsibility of maintaining law and order. The precise extent to which a person must indulge in any of the specified pursuits for being eligible for registration as a bad character cannot be regularised by any hard and fast rules. Wide discretion has to be conceded in favour of the Police department in these matters. Judicial review of such purely administrative discretion is normally not permissible.
5. “Administrative Discretion ” is a well defined term. Several definitions are given to the said term, but the best definition is of Professor Freund in Administrative Powers over Persons and Property, 1928, p. 71. It reads :
“When we speak of administrative discretion, we mean that a determination may be reached, in part at least, upon the basis of consideration not entirely susceptible of proof or disproof…. It may be practically convenient to say that discretion includes the case in which the ascertainment of fact is legitimately left to administrative determination.”
Discretionary powers conferred on the administration can be of various varieties. Maintenance of varieties of registers meant to carry out their functions is one of them. Into that field of administrative discretion, the courts are not supposed to enter.
6. Respondent No. 1 has come with a clear case that the petitioner’s name is not included in the mavali register maintained under Standing Order No. 118 as erroneously assumed by the petitioner. A criminal case and proceedings under section 107, Criminal Procedure Code were initiated against the petitioner in January, 1991. His name was included in the register of bad characters since then with a view to have surveillance.
7. In the instant case, it is unnecessary to go into the question of extent of power of the Police department even to put some one’s name in mavali register under Standing Order No. 118.
8. There is some basis for putting the name of the petitioner in the register of bad characters. It would be improper to adjudicate in writ jurisdiction upon the sufficiency and insufficiency of that material. Existence and correctness of such material has not been questioned by filing a counter affidavit by the petitioner.
9. Under the circumstances, petition is dismissed and the Rule is discharged.
Needless to mention that interim order passed on 28th February, 1994 stands automatically vacated.