In Indian English, a history-sheeter (sometimes referred to as a rowdy-sheeter[1] ) is a person with a long criminal record.[2][3][4] Known as a career criminal outside of South Asia, the term is found in newspapers of South Asian countries such as India[5] and Pakistan.[6]
According to Anastasia Piliavsky, the concept of "history sheeter" has origins in the colonial era rule and its police surveillance codes.[7][8][9] The legal codes allowed preemptive penalties against those listed as a "history sheeter", and these codes were copied into the post-independent Indian Penal Code Sections 109 and 110. The Indian states such as Rajasthan list a person as a "history sheeter" when "his or her criminal record reaches or exceeds thirty offenses," states Piliavsky.[7]
History-sheeter is a broad term that refers to people who have been registered onto a history sheet which can include those who have a history of criminal activities[10] or people who are considered to be a threat to society.[11] This term is most commonly used in India.[12] These history sheets can include a description of where a certain individual has been, a description of their features, jobs, previous crimes and the person’s relationships or connections.[13]
There are two categories of history-sheeters, Class - A history-sheeters are those who are "less hardened criminals" whereas Class - B history-sheeters are those who are "professional criminals... dangerous persons and abettors".[14] The local police officers oversee the regulation of these history sheets and are in control of the decision on whether to register somebody, meaning that many people who lack convictions are on a history sheet simply because an officer considers them to be suspicious.[11]
These history-sheeters are subject to many policies such as the restriction of movement and police surveillance in order to ensure that further criminal activity does not occur, and they are often “treated as social outcasts”.[10] Mrinal Satish[11] describes the nature of the police surveillance of history-sheeters as being constant and not being confined to the specific area they were registered, as information on the individual is passed on to the relevant station if they were to move. These specific policies put in place to deal with these history-sheeters has many implications for both the individuals and the prevalence of crime in contemporary India.
The origin of the concept of history-sheeters can be seen in the British colonial understanding that nomadic lifestyles were difficult to maintain control over,[15] and their efforts to subsequently repress these lifestyles led to the criminalisation of certain groups known as criminal tribes.[16] The subsequent maintenance of these ideas following the independence of India in 1947, saw that the methods used for these criminal tribes were carried over to deal with crime in post-colonial India. These colonial origins help bring into perspective how the term history-sheeters entered the current Indian lexicon and how these policies entered its contemporary systems.
Origins
The origin of the term history-sheeter can be traced back to British colonial rule in India. The conception of the classification of people as a history-sheeter can be seen in their efforts to suppress the way in which the lifestyle of nomadic groups “did not fit the “civilised” mould that the colonial rulers were familiar with”,[11] especially regarding problems the colonial rulers had with collecting taxes and administrating policing.[17]
From the outset, there was a degree of profiling utilised when identifying who may be classified as a history-sheeter, the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 particularly showcases this concept.[11] The Act was guised under the effort to reduce the prevalence of crime, but it was rooted in the ideas that people in a certain caste or group[18] were inherently more inclined to crime. The act grouped these ‘criminally minded’ people into criminal tribes, who were to be surveyed and whose movement should be restricted,[19] essentially suppressing the traditional nomadic lifestyles of many groups in India.[15]
Therefore, in order to deal with this unique, hereditary type of criminality, there was increased significance placed on the police to maintain “pre-emptive surveillance”[20] regardless of the presence of any suspicious behaviour.
The Criminal Tribes Act recognised the difficulties of surveying all the people that were considered to be a part of a ‘criminal tribe’, therefore there was a violent punishment sentiment that seemed to permeate the strategies for limiting the of these ‘criminals’, as it was seen as a prime way to instil fear in order to ensure that crime would not continue.[18] This act went through amendments in 1911 and 1924 before it was formally repealed in 1952.[21]
Following the independence of India from British colonial rule, the Habitual Offenders Act of 1952 was able to rid itself of the classification of certain groups as criminals, but it did retain some of the aspects of the Criminal Tribes Act. The Habitual Offenders Act regulated the activities of those who are labelled as ‘habitual offenders’, which can be described as those who have been sentenced to imprisonment more than twice in a period of five years or has been imprisoned for a total of 12 months.[22]
Additionally, those groups that were considered to be a ‘criminal tribe’ under the Criminal Tribes Act were to be known as denotified tribes under the new Habitual Offenders Act.[23] Under this act, these habitual offenders experienced the restriction of movement similar to those who were considered to be a part of a criminal tribe in colonial India.
Moreover, the police were given additional powers in order to limit the activities of these habitual offenders such as the “power to take finger impressions, photographs and foot-prints at any time”,[22] and for these people to be registered in order to maintain the ability to effectively monitor their activities.[22]
The policies put in place for these habitual offenders directly reflect the restrictions placed on those who are labelled as history-sheeters. Indian legislation like the Criminal Tribes Act and the Habitual Offenders Act have shaped how history-sheeters have been viewed and managed in contemporary India.
Policies
The policies surrounding history-sheeters range from surveillance to the scrupulous attention to the up-keeping of records. These policies occur on various levels of society and they work with the goal of limiting the prevalence of crime and hope to ensure that criminally inclined individuals do not continue to commit crimes and do not become a habitual offender.[11] Surveillance techniques such as monitoring, and restriction of movement are key methods in which these history-sheeters are managed. The reporting of activities is not only done by the police officers in the community but the community itself too.[10]
The community plays a key role in the creation of a history-sheet for a person, as lodgements of complaints,[24] and the opinions on a person’s “habits and general reputation”[14] works in conjunction with the actual convictions of an individual and oversight of the court.[14] History-sheets can also be created if an individual is arrested repeatedly, many of which tend to be made as preventative arrests, which is made possible due to the police’s ability to make these arrests without the authority of a magistrate.[24]
These complaints and reports all contribute to the decision to create a history-sheet and once opened it gets recorded into the relevant Village Crime Diary, where an officer is specifically dedicated in updating this diary.[24] The history sheet of an individual will remain open and in the Village Crime Diary until death, which is different to the policies surrounding convicts without a history-sheet whose names are “removed from this part of diary on expiry of twenty years from his conviction”.[24]
It is further seen that the activities of surveillance get reported onto their file, and this information can be passed on if they were to move out of their area; the police would simply transfer the information to the other officers in the area they have moved to, which is another key feature of the Village Crime Diary.[24] History-sheets also get recorded on the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network System (CCTNS) which is a database in which these history-sheets/records and other criminal records get further centrally uploaded on a national scale.[10]
Further, history-sheeters are considered to be suspects when a crime has occurred. Those history-sheeters who live in the area of the crime are brought in for interrogation, where the threat of violence and the occurrence of violence such as a slap or a kick is occasionally used to receive a confession.[17]
Preventative arrests also took place as a way to limit the occurrence of crime in India, for example in Mumbai alone, there were 15,738 preventative arrests in 2005,[24] showing the prevalence of prevention as a motivation for these arrests that rather than arrests being made once somebody is found guilty of a crime. This is seen to be enshrined in Indian Law, as history-sheeters who are considered “antisocial elements… can be taken into police custody in anticipation of a possible problem”.[25]
Surveillance is also seen as a key deterrent for crime, specifically the fear of it, which is enacted through the construction of non-uniformed shadow teams to ‘watch over’ history-sheeters[25] to limit the possibility that crime could occur. Bhadauria has detailed another range of surveillance techniques used for history-sheeters such as the “secret picketing of the house or approaches to the house of suspects” or “periodical inquiries”[10] regarding personal details of the history-sheeter. These policies aim to reduce the prevalence of crime within India, specifically in targeting history-sheeters.
Impact
Academics have signalled how these policies that surround history-sheeters that work towards reducing the prevalence of crime have had an impact on their lives and Indian society generally. These policies can lead to the "profiling, discrimination, stigmatisation... (and) may result in lifetime suspicion"[26] for history-sheeters. The ease in which a history-sheet is created for an individual poses a host of problems, specifically with regard to how history-sheeters are treated within Indian society. There are many instances which the creation of a history-sheet is done with ulterior motives such as those who use it to target their opponents, whether it be a personal or political opponent.[24] Moreover, the way in which history-sheeters are labelled as 'anti-social elements' and targeted as a suspect when a crime occurs greatly disrupts the lives of history-sheeters, as seen in how "in Maharashtra preventive arrests can exceed the stipulated period of 24 hours and easily last up to two weeks."[24]
These arrests often occur without much evidence or reasoning behind them and has resulted in complaints regarding false preventive arrests to the National Human Rights Commission in Delhi.[24] This in turn frames the role of the police as "protecting peace... and protecting the status quo"[24] rather than the enforcers of law, which as can lead to the and has resulted in resistance to change these systems despite its potential ineffectiveness.[24]
Bhadauria has made alluded for the need for there to be a change in the way that police approach the surveillance of history-sheeters to allow for better rehabilitation and correction of criminal activity in a way that does not evoke a defiant response from history-sheeters. Moreover, Satish highlights the discrimination towards history-sheeters in aspects such as housing and employment opportunities, specifically with regard to private employment and enterprises.
Evidently, domestic servants in India are to be registered with a police station in order for background checks to be run, which includes checking for any criminal antecedents, which could include prior preventive arrests, if any criminal antecedents are found this is reported to employers which usually results in the firing of these domestic servants.[11]
The lack of any legal protection against the discrimination of people with criminal antecedents within Indian courts means that there is the possibility that "if bye-laws of a housing society state that shares cannot be sold to anyone who has ever been arrested or to someone whose is on a surveillance database... their action would be valid".[11] There have also been concerned raised about the privacy concerns for the individuals in Indian society surrounding these policies of surveillance and recording into databases, and can weaken democracy.[26]
Further, 23% of deaths that occurred during police custody between 1980 and 1997 in Delhi were arrested without an alleged offence and 62% were those accused of petty crimes like theft,[17] showing the violence that history-sheeters are subjugated to with the frequent preventive arrests and the specific surveillance of history-sheeters that are enacted in the hopes of reducing crimes.
Electronic tagging is a form of surveillance that uses an electronic device affixed to a person.
Juvenile delinquency, also known as juvenile offending, is the act of participating in unlawful behavior as a minor or individual younger than the statutory age of majority. These acts would otherwise be considered crimes if the individuals committing them were older. The term delinquent usually refers to juvenile delinquency, and is also generalised to refer to a young person who behaves an unacceptable way.
A criminal record is a record of a person's criminal convictions history. The information included in a criminal record, and the existence of a criminal record, varies between countries and even between jurisdictions within a country. In most cases it lists all non-expunged criminal offences and may also include traffic offences such as speeding and drunk driving. In most countries, a criminal record is limited to unexpunged and unexpired actual convictions, while in some it can also include arrests, charges dismissed, charges pending and charges of which the individual has been acquitted. The term rap sheet refers to Record of Arrest and Prosecution, similar to a criminal record.
Meena is a tribe from northern and western India which is sometimes considered a sub-group of the Bhil community. It used to be claimed they speak Mina language, a spurious language. Its name is also transliterated as Meenanda or Mina. They got the status of Scheduled Tribe by the Government of India in 1954.
In the United States, habitual offender laws have been implemented since at least 1952, and are part of the United States Justice Department's Anti-Violence Strategy. These laws require a person who is convicted of an offense and who has one or two other previous serious convictions to serve a mandatory life sentence in prison, with or without parole depending on the jurisdiction. The purpose of the laws is to drastically increase the punishment of those who continue to commit offenses after being convicted of one or two serious crimes.
A habitual offender, repeat offender, or career criminal is a person convicted of a crime who was previously convicted of other crimes. Various state and jurisdictions may have laws targeting habitual offenders, and specifically providing for enhanced or exemplary punishments or other sanctions. They are designed to counter criminal recidivism by physical incapacitation via imprisonment.
Denotified Tribes are the tribes in India that were listed originally under the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871, as Criminal Tribes and "addicted to the systematic commission of non-bailable offences." Once a tribe became "notified" as criminal, all its members were required to register with the local magistrate, failing which they would be charged with a crime under the Indian Penal Code.
Human rights in India is an issue complicated by the country's large size and population as well as its diverse culture, despite its status as the world's largest sovereign, secular, socialist democratic republic. The Constitution of India provides for fundamental rights, which include freedom of religion. Clauses also provide for freedom of speech, as well as separation of executive and judiciary and freedom of movement within the country and abroad. The country also has an independent judiciary as well as bodies to look into issues of human rights.
Sansi are a formerly nomadic people from India that were classified as a criminal tribe in the 19th century by the British during the Raj period. They were stealing food supply from British Government. That's why the British government declared them dacoit.
The Kanjari are a tribe with significant populations in India and Pakistan. The Kanjari language is spoken mostly by the Kanjari people living in Punjab. Kanjari is a lesser-known Indo Aryan language, but almost all also speak Punjabi.
Since the 1870s, various pieces of colonial legislation in India during British rule were collectively called the Criminal Tribes Act (CTA). This criminalised entire communities by designating them as habitual criminals.
The Code of Criminal Procedure, commonly called Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), was the main legislation on procedure for administration of substantive criminal law in India. It was enacted in 1973 and came into force on 1 April 1974. It provides the machinery for the investigation of crime, apprehension of suspected criminals, collection of evidence, determination of guilt or innocence of the accused person and the determination of punishment of the guilty. It also deals with public nuisance, prevention of offences and maintenance of wife, child and parents.
The Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 is a law enacted by the state of Maharashtra in India in 1999 to combat organised crime and terrorism. Known as "MCOCA", the Act provides the State Government with special powers to tackle these issues, including powers of surveillance, relaxed evidentiary standards and procedural safeguards, and prescribing additional criminal penalties, including the death penalty. The law was introduced by a coalition government of the Bharatiya Janata Party and Shiv Sena.
The Habura are a Hindu caste found in the state of Uttar Pradesh, India.
Babaria are a nomadic tribe found mainly in the Indian states of Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.
The Koli is an Indian caste found in Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Karnataka, Odisha and Jammu and Kashmir states in India. Koli is an agriculturist caste of Gujarat but in coastal areas they also work as fishermen along with agriculture. In the beginning of 20th century, the Koli caste was recognised as a denotified tribe under Criminal Tribes Act by the Indian Government because of their anti-social activities during World War I.
Mass surveillance is the pervasive surveillance of an entire or a substantial fraction of a population. Mass surveillance in India includes Surveillance, Telephone tapping, Open-source intelligence, Lawful interception, and surveillance under Indian Telegraph Act, 1885.
Criminal justice reform seeks to address structural issues in criminal justice systems such as racial profiling, police brutality, overcriminalization, mass incarceration, and recidivism. Reforms can take place at any point where the criminal justice system intervenes in citizens’ lives, including lawmaking, policing, sentencing and incarceration. Criminal justice reform can also address the collateral consequences of conviction, including disenfranchisement or lack of access to housing or employment, that may restrict the rights of individuals with criminal records.
The Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Forest Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982, popularly known as the Goondas Act in Tamil Nadu, India and Gundar Sattam in Tamil, is a law for habitual offenders to be detained for a year as a preventive measure.
State violence is the use of force, intimidation, or oppression by a government or ruling body against the citizens within the jurisdiction of said state. This can be seen in a variety of forms, including military violence, settler colonialism, surveillance, immigration law, and other tactics used to express authority over a certain group. State violence can happen through law enforcement or military force, as well as through other branches of government and bureaucracy. State violence is typically justified under the pretense of maintaining law and order, or protecting borders. State violence can include prolonged conditions imposed on individuals that are upheld, unaddressed, or furthered by the state. For example, structural violence that lead to Flint, Michigan having lead-contaminated water may be considered state violence. U.S immigration laws are an additional example of structural violence.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Satish, Mrinal (2011). "Bad Characters, History Sheeters, Budding Goondas and Rowdies": Police Surveillance Files and Intelligence Databases in India". National Law School of India Review. 23: 133–160.
↑ Libertatem Magazine: Issue 9. (2015, October 15). Libertatem Group, p. 31.
↑ Banerjea, D, ed. (2005). Criminal Justice India Series: Volume XVII. Delhi: Allied Publishers.
1 2 3 Singh, Pradeep Kumar (2021). "Policing in India: Need of Effective Preventative Actions to Tackle Crime and Criminality". Jurnal Media Hukum. 28: 136–152.
↑ Gandee, Sarah (2018). "Criminalising the Criminal Tribe: Partition, Borders and the State in India's Punjab". Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East. 38: 557–572.
1 2 3 Khanikar, Santana. State, Violence and Legitimacy in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press India.
1 2 Kapadia, K.M. (1952). "The Criminal Tribes of India". Sociological Bulletin. 1: 99–125.
1 2 Elliott, Carolyn (2012). "Political Society, Civil Society and the State in India". Asian Survey. 52: 348–372.
1 2 Gupta, Arushi (2019). "The case against the constitutional validity of mass surveillance programmes". Indian Law Review. 3: 225–253.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
