Allahabad HC asks Uttar Pradesh DGP why appellant’s criminal history is not in public domain

The Allahabad High Court, while hearing the bail application of Shamsher Ali of Badaun, has asked the Uttar Pradesh Director General of Police (DGP) on why information relating to the criminal history of a citizen is not in the public domain and why it is password protected.

The Division Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Om Prakash Tripathi passed this order while hearing a Criminal Appeal filed by Shamsher.

The Court observed,

“During the course of hearing of the bail application, it transpires that as per the instructions furnished to Government Advocate on August 6, 2021, the appellant has criminal history consisting of four other cases but the same has not been disclosed in the instructions furnished to him earlier.

In the counter affidavit dated September 04, 2019 filed by Sukhpal Singh, Sub-Inspector, Police Station Zarif Nagar, District Badaun, it is stated that “the appellant has no criminal history to his credit”.

Additional Government Advocate S.A. Murtaza is unable to explain the above discrepancy and why complete facts have not been brought before this Court while filing counter affidavit.

The Court directed Sukhpal Singh, who has filed the counter affidavit on behalf of the State in the instant appeal, to remain present before the Court on January 10, 2022 along with his explanation.

The Court further directed that in the meantime, Superintendent of Police, Badaun will hold an enquiry, ascertain correct facts and submit his report along with his affidavit. In case, he comes to the conclusion that the appellant had criminal history but it was not disclosed in the counter affidavit, he shall identify the person responsible for furnishing incorrect information and take appropriate action against him and apprise the Court of the same in the affidavit to be filed by him.

Also Read: Gauhati HC directs Kamrup DC to issue ration cards within 8 weeks to eligible slum-dwellers

The instructions furnished by AGA in which criminal history of the appellant is disclosed is taken on record and is marked ‘X’ for the purposes of identification.

On a query made by the Court as to why the search report annexed with the counter affidavit does not indicate the criminal history of the appellant and whether the AGA drafting the counter affidavit himself made search to ascertain the correctness of the information being provided to him or not, the AGA submitted that the website of District Crime Records Bureau (DCRB) and Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) are not accessible through the office of the Advocate General/Government Advocate and only the district police has access to the same, the court noted.

“We fail to understand why information relating to the criminal history of a citizen is not in the public domain and why it is password protected. We call upon the Director General of Police to examine the said aspect and file his affidavit disclosing the website/platform from where such information could be accessed by the public at large. If no such access is available, he shall also disclose the remedial measures which he proposes to take,”

-the court said.

The Court has fixed the next hearing of the petition on January 10, 2022.