The Allahabad High Court has quashed a B-Class history sheet opened against a man, holding that his involvement in different criminal cases, by itself, did not establish that he was a professional or expert criminal warranting lifelong police surveillance under Regulation 228 of the U.P. Police Regulations.
A Division Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena noted that the petitioner had eight criminal cases registered against him, but the offences were diverse in nature and several had resulted in bail, compromise, final report or exculpation. Importantly, the last crime recorded against him dated back to 2015, while the history sheet was opened in 2020 and no intervening crime was recorded.
The Court emphasised that a B-Class history sheet is intended for confirmed and professional criminals, and carries the consequence of continued surveillance, ordinarily until death. It held that the petitioner’s criminal record did not establish the professional or expert criminality contemplated under Regulation 228.
Also Read AI in Law: Why Legal Judgment Cannot Be Outsourced
The Bench further observed that opening a history sheet is deeply invasive of an individual’s liberty and privacy, as surveillance can involve monitoring movements, associations, occupation and conduct. Such measures must therefore be imposed with care and constitutional sensitivity.
Finding that the Senior Superintendent of Police had granted little more than a rubber stamped approval without recording why the petitioner qualified as a professional or expert criminal, the Court held that the approval lacked the requisite application of mind and violated the constitutional guarantees of privacy and personal liberty under Articles 19 and 21.
The Court accordingly allowed the writ petition and quashed both the February 27, 2020 order approving the history sheet and the B-Class history sheet itself.
