History-sheeter

Last updated

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]

Contents

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.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Electronic tagging</span> Form of surveillance

Electronic tagging is a form of surveillance that uses an electronic device affixed to a person.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Juvenile delinquency</span> Illegal behavior by minors

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. In the United States of America, a juvenile delinquent is a person who commits a crime and is under a specific age. Most states specify a juvenile delinquent, or young offender, as an individual under 18 years of age while a few states have set the maximum age slightly different. In 2021, Michigan, New York, and Vermont raised the maximum age to under 19, and Vermont law was updated again in 2022 to include individuals under the age of 20. Only three states, Georgia, Texas, and Wisconsin still appropriate the age of a juvenile delinquent as someone under the age of 17. While the maximum age in some US states has increased, Japan has lowered the juvenile delinquent age from under 20 to under 18. This change occurred on April 1, 2022 when the Japanese Diet activated a law lowering the age of minor status in the country. Just as there are differences in the maximum age of a juvenile delinquent, the minimum age for a child to be considered capable of delinquency or the age of criminal responsibility varies considerably between the states. Some states that impose a minimum age have made recent amendments to raise the minimum age, but most states remain ambiguous on the minimum age for a child to be determined a juvenile delinquent. In 2021, North Carolina changed the minimum age from 6 years old to 10 years old while Connecticut moved from 7 to 10 and New York made an adjustment from 7 to 12. In some states the minimum age depends on the seriousness of the crime committed. Juvenile delinquents or juvenile offenders commit crimes ranging from status offenses such as, truancy, violating a curfew or underage drinking and smoking to more serious offenses categorized as property crimes, violent crimes, sexual offenses, and cybercrimes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Meena</span> Ethnic group in western India

Meena is a tribe from 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. They are also called Minavar.

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, 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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sansi people</span> Rajputana inherited clan in India

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 cattle thieves by profession. They claim Rajput descent. There were two distinct offshoots of the tribe: the first was a vagrant community connected to the Jat tribes of Central Punjab; the second was an agricultural Jat clan found in Sahiwal, Amritsar and Gujranwala.

Kanjar is a tribe with significant populations in India and Pakistan.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Tribes Act</span> Legislation in British India

Since the 1870s, various pieces of colonial legislation in India during British rule were collectively called the Criminal Tribes Act (CTA), which criminalized entire communities by designating them as habitual criminals. Under these acts, ethnic or social communities in India were defined as "addicted to the systematic commission of non-bailable offences" such as thefts, and were registered by the government. Adult males of the groups were forced to report weekly to local police, and had restrictions on their movement imposed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bureau of Indian Affairs Police</span>

The Bureau of Indian Affairs Police, Office of Justice Services, also known as BIA Police, is the law enforcement arm of the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs. The BIA's official mission is to "uphold the constitutional sovereignty of the Federally recognized Tribes and preserve peace within Indian country". It provides police, investigative, corrections, technical assistance, and court services across the over 567 registered Indian tribes and reservations, especially those lacking their own police force; additionally, it oversees tribal police organizations. BIA services are provided through the Office of Justice Services Division of Law Enforcement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act</span> Law enacted by Government of Maharashtra to combat Organised crime and Terrorism

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.

The Kanmailia are a Muslim community found in the state of Uttar Pradesh in India. Their preferred self-designation is Shaikh.

Babaria are a hindu community found mainly in the Indian states of Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.they also known as rajbohra in rajsthan history.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mass surveillance in India</span> Overview of mass surveillance in India

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal justice reform in the United States</span> Reforms addressing structural issues in criminal justice systems of the United States

Criminal justice reform addresses 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 feminist pathways perspective is a feminist perspective of criminology which suggests victimization throughout the life course is a key risk factor for women's entry into offending.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Police surveillance in New York City</span>

The New York City Police Department (NYPD) actively monitors public activity in New York City, New York, United States. Historically, surveillance has been used by the NYPD for a range of purposes, including against crime, counter-terrorism, and also for nefarious or controversial subjects such as monitoring political demonstrations, activities, and protests, and even entire ethnic and religious groups.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tamil Nadu Goondas Act</span>

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.

References

  1. ↑ "Definition of History-Sheeter by Cambridge Dictionary".
  2. ↑ "Definition of History-Sheeter by Oxford Dictionary". Lexico Dictionaries. Archived from the original on July 11, 2020. Retrieved 2020-07-10. A person with a criminal record.
  3. ↑ Tom Dalzell; Terry Victor (2015). The New Partridge Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English. Taylor & Francis. p. 9722. ISBN   978-1-317-37251-6.
  4. ↑ Christiane Dalton-Puffer; Nikolaus Ritt (2011). Words: Structure, Meaning, Function: A Festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky. Walter de Gruyter. p. 35. ISBN   978-3-11-080916-9.
  5. ↑ K. Balasankaran Nair (2004). Law of Contempt of Court in India. Atlantic Publishers & Dist. pp. 100 footnote 92, 103. ISBN   978-81-269-0359-7.
  6. ↑ World Englishes: Critical Concepts in Linguistics, Volume 2 by Kingsley Bolton, Braj B. Kachru, p. 247 gbook
  7. 1 2 Anastasia Piliavsky (2013). David N. Gellner (ed.). Borderland Lives in Northern South Asia. Duke University Press. pp. 45 note 26. ISBN   978-0-8223-7730-6.
  8. ↑ All India Reporter. D.V. Chitaley. 1946. p. 147.
  9. ↑ Uttar Pradesh (India). Legislature. Legislative Council (1934). Proceedings: official report. Adhīkshaka. p. 318.
  10. 1 2 3 4 5 Bhadauria, Y (1980). "Reactions of History-Sheeters Towards Police Surveillance" (PDF). Indian Journal of Social Work. 41: 45–50.
  11. 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.
  12. ↑ Libertatem Magazine: Issue 9. (2015, October 15). Libertatem Group, p. 31.
  13. ↑ Banerjea, D, ed. (2005). Criminal Justice India Series: Volume XVII. Delhi: Allied Publishers.
  14. 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.
  15. 1 2 Bhukya, Bhangya; Surepally, Sujatha (2021). "Unveiling the World of the Nomadic Tribes and Denotified Tribes: An Introduction".
  16. ↑ 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.
  17. 1 2 3 Khanikar, Santana. State, Violence and Legitimacy in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press India.
  18. 1 2 Kapadia, K.M. (1952). "The Criminal Tribes of India". Sociological Bulletin. 1: 99–125.
  19. ↑ Criminal Tribes Act No. I of 1923. Retrieved from https://www.indiacode.nic.in/repealed-act/repealed_act_documents/A1923-1.pdf
  20. ↑ Schwarz, H (2010). Constructing the Criminal Tribe in Colonial India: Acting Like a Thief. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
  21. ↑ Kulshrestha, P (2021). "Criminal Act repealed 69 years ago, but communities continue to be looked upon suspiciously by society". The Times of India .
  22. 1 2 3 Habitual Offenders Act 1952 (Jammu and Kashmir). Retrieved https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/4911/1/habitual_offenders_act.pdf
  23. ↑ D'Souza, D (1999). "Denotified Tribes: Still 'Criminal'?". Economic and Political Weekly. 34: 3576–3578.
  24. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Gooptu, Nandini; Parry, Jonathan, eds. (2017-09-22). Persistence of Poverty in India. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315146973. ISBN   978-1-315-14697-3.
  25. 1 2 Elliott, Carolyn (2012). "Political Society, Civil Society and the State in India". Asian Survey. 52: 348–372.
  26. 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.