IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Kshitij Shailendra, JJ.
Aftab Alam – Petitioner
Versus
State Of U.P. And Others – Respondents
Criminal Misc. Writ petition No. - 9074 of 2022
Decided On : 04-03-2024
History Sheet - Surveillance - Regulation 228, Regulation 232, Regulation 233 - The court discussed the concept and philosophy behind history sheets, the modern age challenges for crime controlling agencies, and the facts of the present case. The court analyzed the U.P. Police Regulations and concluded that while no writ of certiorari can be issued quashing the history sheet opened against the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to submit a representation before the D.I.G. concerned, as per the observations made in the present order.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the history sheet opened against him and to stop the surveillance based on the quashing of a solitary criminal case. The court found that apart from the solitary case, no other case was registered against the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no writ of certiorari can be issued quashing the history sheet opened against the petitioner, but the petitioner is entitled to submit a representation before the D.I.G. concerned.
Issues: The main issues were whether the history sheet of Class ‘B’ can be closed or quashed and whether the petitioner can be kept under surveillance despite the quashing of the solitary criminal case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the petitioner is entitled to submit a representation before the D.I.G. concerned, as per the observations made in the present order.
Final Decision: The petition stands disposed off with a direction that the petitioner is entitled to file a comprehensive representation before the D.I.G. concerned, and the D.I.G. concerned shall pass a reasoned and speaking order strictly in consonance with Regulations 232 and 233 and any other relevant Regulation of the U.P. Police Regulations.
JUDGMENT :
Kshitij Shailendra, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Manju Thakur, learned A.G.A.-I along with Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A-1 for the State and perused the record.
THE WRIT PETITION
2. This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing History Sheet No.21-B opened against the petitioner at Police Station Shahganj, District Allahabad with a further prayer to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to keep surveillance on the petitioner in pursuance of the said history sheet.
CONCEPT OF AND PHILOSOPHY BEHIND HISTORY SHEET
3. When the term "history-sheeter" is mentioned, it conjures an image of a seasoned criminal with an extensive record. The question arises: who exactly are these history-sheeters, and how does the police categorize someone as such? What disadvantages does a criminal face after being labeled a history-sheeter, and what consequences does it entail? These queries find answers in the following exploration.
4. In essence, a history sheeter is a designation employed by the police to identify individuals with a significant criminal history. This label is affixed to those who have been implicated in numerous offenses, with the details of their criminal activities duly recorded by the police. Before initiating the history sheet for any offender, the police verify the individual's current criminal status.
5. The process begins when an individual, already proven guilty in multiple cases and/or consistently engaging in criminal activities, attracts the attention of the police station's SHO. A report is subsequently sent to the SSP or SP, and upon receiving the necessary orders, the history sheet is opened. This comprehensive document contains detailed information about the criminal, including a criminal profile, associates, and known relatives. In certain scenarios, where individuals hesitate to report crimes related to organized rackets or extortion, the police, relying on local sources, maintain surveillance on such potential threats to society. The opening of history sheets is guided by calls, daily entries in the police control room, and the ongoing assessment of those posing a danger to society.
6. The presence of a history sheet serves as a deterrent, as it subjects the criminals to constant police scrutiny. Once a history sheet is opened, the criminals are required to regularly register their presence at the police station; failure to comply prompts the police authorities to visit their residences. Furthermore, a history sheet aids in tracing the source of income for criminals, enabling authorities to determine whether they have transitioned to legitimate means of earning. This scrutiny helps identify instances where an individual, previously engaged in illegal activities, displays signs of leading a luxurious lifestyle despite being unemployed.
7. The process of opening "History Sheet" is governed by the Police Rules of the concerned State or the Act governing habitual offenders.
8. Criminals often attempt to evade capture by frequently changing addresses. To counter this, the police communicate with other districts or States, sharing information about potential areas of relocation and requesting vigilant monitoring. Employing various strategies like crime mapping and identifying hot spots, law enforcement aims to curb criminal activities and maintain public safety.
9. History sheets are analogous to our criminal intelligence databases, but are more subject to legal constraints. At the same time, they are more vulnerable to public disclosure because they call for intensive and frequently conspicuous monitoring both by police and civilian leaders.
10. Since the days of the British regime, Indian police departments have created history sheets for persons believed to pose a risk of future criminality. The “history-sheeters” may have been convicted, or have criminal charges pending. History sheeters are subject to
Mohd. Safi Vs. State of Uttarakhand
Captain Sube Singh & others Vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi & others
Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai Vs. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala
Competent Authority Vs. Barangore Jute Factory & others
Dhananjaya Reddy Vs. State of Karnataka 2001 (4) SCC 9
Krishna Chandra Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Sanjay Karnwal Vs. State of U.P.
Sant Lal Gupta v. Modern Coop. Group Housing Society Ltd.
State of Jharkhand & others Vs. Ambay Cements & another
State of Tamil Nadu and Others v. K. Shyam Sunder and Others
The petitioner is entitled to submit a representation before the D.I.G. concerned, as per the observations made in the present order.
The court emphasized the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice when opening history sheets, requiring police to provide individuals an opportunity to contest such actions.
Police cannot unjustly open a history-sheet without evidence of habitual criminality; individual rights must be respected.
Continuation of history sheets against acquitted individuals without pending cases violates fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21 of the Constitution.
The continuation of history sheets against acquitted individuals without pending cases infringes upon their fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21 of the Constitution.
The opening of a history sheet against an individual must be in accordance with the relevant police rules and should not offend the individual's fundamental rights, particularly Article 21 of the Con....
The designation of an individual as a history sheeter must adhere strictly to procedural requirements, with due consideration given to acquittals and justification for surveillance, in accordance wit....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.