The Kerala High Court has reaffirmed that the essence of Indian criminal jurisprudence lies in reformation rather than mere punishment, while ordering the removal of a man's name and photograph from the rowdy list maintained by the Fort Kochi Police Station.

Justice PV Kunhikrishnan, while deciding the plea in Nixon v. City Police Commissioner, observed that a person's criminal behavior is often influenced by external factors like poverty, lack of education, unemployment, and unaddressed mental health issues.

“To remove criminal activities from our society, better education, creating job opportunities, support for mental health, community engagement, etc., are important. By addressing these underlying factors, society can work towards reducing crime rates,” the Court noted.

The judge also emphasized that society plays a vital role not just in creating conditions that lead to crime but also in facilitating the reformation of those who have committed offences.

"An environment in which society continues to blame criminals simply because of their past history should be avoided," the Court stated, adding, "A person is not born as a criminal."

Citing the story of sage Valmiki—who, according to Hindu mythology, reformed from a life of crime to become the author of the Ramayana—the Court underlined that individuals are capable of transformation if given the opportunity.

Justice Kunhikrishnan also recalled his 2023 order granting parole to notorious convict “Ripper” Jayanandhan for the launch of his book, saying it was a step toward acknowledging the possibility of reformation. However, he clarified, “I am not saying that the above-mentioned person is already reformed... but it seems he is on the path of reformation.”

The petitioner in the present case had argued that he had not been accused in any criminal case in the last eight years, maintained steady employment, changed his circle of friends, and regularly attended church. He also pointed out that he had been acquitted in all but one of the past cases.

The prosecution opposed the plea, claiming the petitioner still had links to those involved in criminal activities and required continued monitoring.

However, the Court allowed the petition, finding merit in the claim of reformation. It directed the police to remove the petitioner's name and photograph from the rowdy list, while noting that the intention behind maintaining such a list is to protect society, not to stigmatize individuals.

The Court also clarified that rowdy sheets are confidential documents not meant for public display and are kept in areas accessible only to police personnel, thereby safeguarding the privacy of individuals.

The petitioner was represented by Advocate Shabu Sreedharan. Senior Public Prosecutor P. Narayanan and Senior Government Pleader Sajju S. appeared for the State.