Allahabad High Court Directs State Govt, DGP To Ensure Criminal History Of Accused Is Available At One Stroke

The Allahabad High Court has directed the State's Principal Secretary Home and DGP to take necessary steps so that the criminal history of an accused is available in one stroke.

The Court has also asked the authorities to fix the responsibility of the person responding in Court(s) through instructions/reply/affidavit or otherwise for disclosing the entire criminal history of the accused.

"With the present digital age where everything is now possible and available with the press of a button or a click of a mouse, it cannot be said that the criminal history of a person cannot be gathered by the police agency instantaneously through a dedicated portal for it for reporting it to the Courts. If the same is not updated or is non functional, it is a matter of concern," the court remarked.

The bench of Justice Samit Gopal ordered thus as it denied anticipatory bail to Former MP Bal Bal Kumar Patel Alias Raj Kumar who happens to be the brother of Slain dacoit Dadua in connection with a cheating case.

Significantly, during the course of the hearing, the Court noted the discrepancies in the filing of a counter affidavit with regard to the criminal antecedents of the Accused.

Essentially, in a counter affidavit (dated June 10, 2022) filed by Sub-Inspector Brahmdev Goswami on behalf of the State of U.P., it was initially mentioned that he had no criminal history to his credit.

However, in response to the counter affidavit filed by the Sub-Inspector, the counsel for the first informant made an objection and apprised the Court that the accused, in fact, had a criminal history of 11 cases.

In view of the apparent discrepancy in the filing of the criminal history of the accused, the Court took cognizance of it and sought a personal affidavit of the Superintendent of Police, Banda and in that affidavit, it was disclosed that the applicant in fact had a criminal history of 27 cases including the present case.

Against the backdrop of these circumstances, the Court, at the outset, observed that the manner in which this fact emerged and that too on the pointing out of counsel for the first informant is a matter of concern.

"Although the criminal antecedents of a person may not be the sole decisive factor in a case but surely need to be looked upon while deciding a matter...There may be a case where the first informant may not be represented in a Court of law and thus the Court believing the affidavit filed by the State / Police authorities to be true proceeds to hear and decide the matter but the actual fact about the criminal history of the accused would not come before the Court," the Court further added.

Consequently, the Court directed the Principal Secretary (Home), Government of Uttar Pradesh, and the Director General of Police, Government of Uttar Pradesh to look into this issue and do the needful and also take up the issue at their level for having the details of the criminal history of a person at one stroke.

The Court further ordered that the responsibility should be fixed for the person responding in Court(s) through instructions/reply/affidavit or otherwise for disclosing the entire criminal history of the accused failing which there should be some deterrent for it to avoid intentional efforts to shield the accused persons and not disclose their criminal history before the concerned courts.

Case title - Bal Kumar Patel Alias Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another