1 2025:CGHC:57384-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPCR No. 602 of 2025 Vikas Kumar Gupta S/o Ashok Kumar Gupta Aged About 41 Years Caste- Sudi, R/o Village Baskepi, Police Station Balrampur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Ministry of Home, Mantralaya, Indravati Bhavan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director General of Police Police Headquarters, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Inspector General of Police Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Superintendent of Police (S.P.) District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh 5 - Station House Officer Balrampur Police Station, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Devershi Thakur, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Deputy Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 26 .11.2025 1. Heard Mr. Devershi Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondents. ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.11.26 16:18:20 +0530 2 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:- “10.1 Issue an appropriate Writ or direction commanding and directing the Respondent authorities to immediately and forthwith remove the name of the Petitioner from the Gunda list (List of Hooligans/Undesirable Persons) maintained at Balrampur Police Station and Ganesh Mod Police Chowki, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, in view of his complete acquittal in all three criminal cases. 10.2 Issue an appropriate Writ or direction prohibiting the Respondent police officials from visiting the residence of the Petitioner, calling him to the police station, or subjecting him to any form of harassment, intimidation, or surveillance. 10.3 Any other relief or reliefs that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted also. Affidavit in support is filed herewith.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner, Vikas Kumar Gupta, is an agricultural farmer by profession, earning his livelihood through honest agricultural work. He enjoys a good reputation in his community and has never indulged in any unlawful activity. It is submitted that the Petitioner was maliciously and falsely implicated in three criminal cases owing to personal enmity harboured by certain individuals. However, in all the three cases, namely FIR No. 30/2011, Special Sessions Trial No. 30/2011, and Criminal Case No. 168/2015, the Petitioner was acquitted after full-fledged trials, and the acquittal orders clearly record the Petitioner’s complete exoneration. Thus, the innocence of the Petitioner stands conclusively established. 3 4. Despite this undisputed fact, learned counsel submits that the Respondent authorities have arbitrarily and without any lawful basis continued to retain the Petitioner’s name in the “Gunda/Badmash List” at Balrampur Police Station and Ganesh Mod Police Chowki. This illegal continuation has resulted in persistent harassment, including unwarranted police visits to the Petitioner’s residence, compelled attendance at the police station under the guise of routine inquiries, and intensified interference especially during festive occasions, thereby causing immense mental agony, public humiliation, and violation of the Petitioner's peaceful enjoyment of life. He submits that the Petitioner had submitted detailed written representations dated 24.12.2021 and 24.01.2022 before the Superintendent of Police, enclosing all acquittal orders, seeking removal of his name from the said list. However, the authorities have neither acted upon nor even acknowledged these representations, demonstrating a clear abuse of administrative power. 5. It is contended that the action of the Respondents is wholly illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the Petitioner’s fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. The continued branding of the Petitioner as a “Gunda/Badmash” despite clean acquittals violates Article 14 as likewise-situated individuals have been removed from such surveillance lists. The continuous police harassment and compelled attendance violate the freedom guaranteed under Article 19, while the mental trauma and intrusion upon personal liberty amount to a breach of Article 21. Further, the Respondents' conduct results in subjecting the Petitioner to double jeopardy in the spirit of Article 20(2) by punishing 4 him repeatedly for offences of which he already stands acquitted. He places reliance on Regulation 855 of the Chhattisgarh Police Regulations, which permits surveillance only of those persons who habitually lead a criminal life or pose danger to public peace. The Petitioner does not fall within any such category, and therefore, the continuing inclusion of his name is patently unlawful. It is therefore submitted that the entire conduct of the Respondent authorities is tainted with mala fides, motivated solely to harass and humiliate the Petitioner despite his complete exoneration, and such action cannot withstand judicial scrutiny. The Petitioner is further entitled to appropriate compensation for the illegal harassment, mental agony, and violation of his fundamental rights. As such, he prayed that a direction be issued to Respondents to forthwith remove the Petitioner’s name from the Gunda/Badmash list, restrain the Respondents from any further harassment, and grant such other reliefs including compensation as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the Petitioner and submits that the allegations of harassment or arbitrary action by the Respondent authorities are misconceived and are denied in entirety. It is contended that the inclusion of names in the surveillance or “Gunda” list is undertaken strictly in accordance with the relevant Police Regulations and on the basis of material available with the police at the relevant time. He further submits that the Petitioner’s representations dated 24.12.2021 and 24.01.2022 are already under consideration before the 5 competent authority. It is further submitted that there is no deliberate inaction or mala fide on the part of the Respondents, and that administrative examination of such representations requires verification of antecedents and other relevant inputs from field officers. 7. It is contended that the State has no objection if this Court deems it appropriate to direct the competent authority to consider and decide the Petitioner’s pending representations in accordance with law within a reasonable time frame. Learned State counsel assures that, subject to such directions, the Respondent authorities shall expeditiously examine the Petitioner’s representations and pass a speaking and reasoned order as per the applicable Police Regulations and prevailing legal framework. Learned State counsel therefore prays that the writ petition need not be entertained on merits at this stage, as the grievance of the Petitioner can be adequately addressed by directing the competent authority to consider and decide his representations expeditiously in accordance with law. 8. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, and upon a careful examination of the documents and materials brought on record, this Court is of the considered view that the grievance of the Petitioner can be sufficiently addressed without entering into the disputed factual matrix or adjudicating upon the merits of the allegations. The primary relief sought by the Petitioner pertains to the consideration of his pending representations seeking removal of his name from the Gunda/Badmash list, and such relief can be effectively 6 granted by directing the competent authority to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. 9. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Respondents, particularly the competent authority of the Police Department, to consider and decide the Petitioner’s representations dated 24.12.2021 and 24.01.2022 in accordance with law, applicable rules, and relevant police regulations. The authority shall do so after due verification of records and by giving due regard to the acquittal orders relied upon by the Petitioner, and shall pass a speaking and reasoned order. The entire exercise shall be completed within six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, and the decision shall be communicated to the Petitioner forthwith. 10. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the rival claims or the legality of the Petitioner's inclusion in the Gunda/Badmash list. All contentions of both parties are left open to be considered independently by the competent authority. 11. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu