Safeguarding Dignity and Preventing Bias in Police History Sheets: Supreme Court’s Recent Judgment on Maintenance of Police History Sheets and Surveillance Register.

On May 7th, 2024, our Supreme Court had delivered an important judgment pertaining to the maintenance of Police History Sheets and Surveillance Register for criminals. The Supreme Court had taken steps to protect the dignity and privacy of individuals, especially minors and those from disadvantaged communities, in the context of police history sheets. Our Apex Court had issued certain guidelines for the inclusion of individuals in Police History Sheets and Surveillance Register. Further, our apex court had also directed all the States/UTs to revisit all the standing orders/guidelines prescribed by the concerned State Governments and make them in line with the standing order issued by Delhi Police and guidelines of the Supreme Court. We have summarized the standing order issued by Delhi Police and guidelines issued by our Hon’ble Supreme Court with all its key observations.

Keywords.

Police History Sheet, Police Surveillance Register, Non-disclosure of identity, Punjab Police Rules 1934.

Case Name- Amanatullah Khan Versus The Commissioner Of Police, Delhi & Ors arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5719/2023.

Brief Summary

The appellant, Amanatullah Khan, approached the Delhi High Court challenging the inclusion of details about his minor children and wife in his ‘History Sheet’ maintained by the Delhi Police. The High Court dismissed his petition. The Supreme Court took note that the format for History Sheets was based on archaic Punjab Police Rules of 1934. It expressed concerns about potential prejudicial treatment of individuals from disadvantaged communities in maintaining such police records. The Delhi Police then issued an amended order on 21.03.2024 addressing the court’s concerns about protecting the dignity and privacy of minors and innocent individuals. The Amended Standing Order dated 21.03.2024 tends to provide proper instructions to Police Officers as to who can be filled inside the column “relations and connections”. The instructions are summarized below for our readers’ reference:-

• It should only reflect identities of those persons who can provide shelter to the offender when he/she is absconding from police.
• It should include the offender’s associates in crime, abettors, and receivers.
• No details of any minor relatives (son, daughter, siblings) should be recorded unless there is evidence that the minor had provided shelter to the absconding offender.
• It mandates following Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, which prohibits disclosing identities of children in conflict with law, children in need of care and protection, or child victims/witnesses.
• Although the History Sheet is an internal police document, care must be taken that identities of only those minor relatives are entered against whom evidence exists that they had provided shelter to the absconding offender.
• Additional details like phone numbers, Aadhaar numbers, EPIC numbers, email IDs, social media profiles, etc. of the offender’s associates/relatives/acquaintances should be collected and recorded.

In summary, the amended order aims to prevent unwarranted disclosure of minors’ identities in History Sheets and mandates collecting detailed information about the offender’s known associates while maintaining confidentiality as per the Juvenile Justice Act.

In connection to the above Standing Orders issued by the Delhi Police, our Apex Court had disposed of the petition stating that the reliefs sought by the petitioner were largely addressed through standing orders. Further, in order to guard against the improper use of History Sheets and Surveillance Sheets, our Hon’ble Supreme Court had issued certain directions to the Delhi Police and other State/UT police. The Directions are as follows:

Directions issued by the Supreme Court:

To State of Delhi:

• Directed the Delhi Police to implement the amended Standing Order dated 21.03.2024 forthwith in the appellant’s case. This order prohibited including details of minor relatives in History Sheets unless they had provided shelter to the offender while absconding.
• Directed the Commissioner of Police, Delhi to designate a senior officer (Joint Commissioner or above) to periodically audit/review the contents of History Sheets.
• The designated senior officer shall ensure confidentiality and expunge names of innocent persons/juveniles from the “relations and connections” column of History Sheets.
• Warned of prompt action against any Delhi Police officer found acting contrary to the amended Standing Order and court’s directions.

To other States and Union Territories;

The Supreme Court had expanded the scope of this case using suo motu powers for issuing certain directions to all States and Union Territories. This was to address potential prejudicial treatment of individuals from socially, economically, and educationally disadvantaged backgrounds, including Backward Classes, Scheduled Castes, and Scheduled Tribes, in maintaining Police Diaries and History Sheets. The directions are:

• Directed all States and Union Territories not to make mechanical entries in history sheets.
• Directed all States and Union Territories to revisit their policy regime and consider making amendments on the lines of the “Delhi Model” to uphold dignity, privacy, and non-discrimination in police procedures within six months.

Conclusion:

We find that this Judgment is a vital piece of precedent which can be used by our professionals in cases where mechanical entries are made in the History and Surveillance Sheets followed by the register. This judgment acts as a principle for every police officer on how a History and Surveillance Sheet should be maintained.

In essence, this judgment aims to strike a balance between effective police surveillance of criminals and protecting the fundamental rights of the general public, especially vulnerable sections like minors and disadvantaged communities.

Read our recent summaries.