Allahabad High Court: In an application filed seeking the quashing of the entire criminal proceedings, summoning order, and chargesheet arising out of a case registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), read with Sections 60 and 63 of the Excise Act, a Single Judge Bench of Vinod Diwakar, J. after reviewing the records and documents, found that it was prima facie established that the accused had been arrested on the spot. The investigation further revealed that the accused was allegedly the gang leader involved in liquor smuggling across state borders.
Therefore, the Court held that there were no grounds to quash the criminal proceedings against the accused. The Court emphasised that questions relating to the assessment of evidence, reliability, or credibility of the prosecution did not fall within the scope of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Furthermore, the Court found no evidence that the proceedings had been initiated with malice, ulterior motives, or personal vendetta. Consequently, the application was dismissed as devoid of merit.
The Court directed the Uttar Pradesh government and its Director General of Police (‘DGP’) to amend the police manuals to prohibit the disclosure of caste in investigations and related public records.
Background
On 29-04-2023, acting on instructions from senior officers, the local police began checking vehicles near the Jaunai Farm police post in District Etawah. During this operation, a black Scorpio was stopped, and three individuals were found inside, one of them was the accused. A personal search led to the recovery of mobile phones and small amounts of cash from each individual.
A search of the vehicle revealed 70 bottles of Royal Challenge and 36 bottles of Royal Stage whisky, both marked “For Sale in Haryana Only,” along with fake and duplicate number plates. Upon interrogation, the occupants disclosed that their associates in a white Accent car were following with more liquor. This second vehicle was intercepted shortly thereafter, and two more individuals were found inside. A search led to the recovery of an additional 230 bottles of Royal Challenge and 24 bottles of Royal Stage whisky, as well as more fake number plates.
None of the occupants could produce valid licenses for transporting the liquor. All admitted to being part of an illicit liquor distribution operation led by the accused. They allegedly transported liquor from Haryana to Bihar for resale at higher prices and used fake number plates to avoid detection.
The accused, however, claimed he had been falsely implicated. He submitted that he was in Etawah for a family gathering following a relative’s death and had sought a lift on the highway late at night due to unavailability of public transport. He asserted he had no prior acquaintance with the other individuals and was merely a passenger.
During the proceedings the Court had noted that the police records unnecessarily mentioned the caste of each accused. As a result, the Court directed the Director General of Police to file a personal affidavit explaining the relevance of stating caste in police investigations, particularly in a caste-sensitive society. Pursuant to this direction, the DGP submitted an affidavit in response.
Analysis and Decision
The Court observed that none of the prescribed police formats, including the FIR, Crime Detail Form, Arrest Memo, and Final Report, required mandatory mention of caste or religion for identifying accused persons. While some forms captured caste and religion details under broader sections, especially for socio-economic profiling or victim data, identification could be adequately made using physical descriptors. Importantly, the Court Disposal Form, Result of Appeal, and Property Seizure Memo did not require any caste or religion details at all.
The Court noted that the DGP’s affidavit emphasised three key justifications for mentioning caste in police records. First, it was stated that identification of the accused by caste was done to avoid any confusion regarding their identity. Second, the affidavit clarified that the contents of the investigation formats could only be amended by the Union Government or the National Crime Records Bureau. Third, it was asserted that the police did not discriminate against accused persons based on their caste or religion, and that investigations were conducted strictly in accordance with the procedure established by law. With respect to caste, the affidavit claimed that scientific methods of investigation remained unaffected by any caste-based considerations and had no impact on the mindset of law enforcement agencies.
The Court said that the police’s justification for identifying accused persons by their caste was a legal fallacy. It observed with dismay that even in the first quarter of the 21st century, law enforcement continued to rely on caste as a means of identification, which the Court termed unfortunate and untenable. The Court noted that with the availability of modern identification tools such as body cameras, mobile cameras, fingerprints, Aadhaar cards, mobile numbers, and parental details, reliance on caste was unnecessary.
Moreover, the investigation formats themselves already contained extensive descriptive fields, including sex, date/year of birth, build, height, complexion, identification marks, deformities, teeth, hair, eyes, habits, dress habits, language/dialect, burn marks, leukoderma, moles, scars, and tattoos. In light of this, the Court found the reasoning offered by the Director General of Police unconvincing.
Regarding the second justification, that only the Union Government or NCRB could amend the formats, the Court held this to be legally unsustainable. It clarified that policing falls under the State List (Schedule VII of the Constitution), and hence the State Government had the authority to amend such formats to further the constitutional objective of a casteless society. The Court expressed concern that the State had not taken any such steps, terming the inaction a failure to align with constitutional morality.
As to the third issue, the Court stressed the need to re-examine the recording of caste and religion in police and public records. In a caste-ridden society where deep-rooted social divisions influence not just public perception but also the functioning of government institutions, it found it imperative to question and reconsider these entrenched practices.
The Court said that caste in India is not merely social stratification but a deeply ingrained psychological and legal phenomenon influencing identity, behavior, and access to rights. Despite constitutional guarantees of equality, caste-based discrimination persists, rooted in historical privilege and social conditioning.
Caste pride often masks insecurity and status anxiety among privileged groups, manifesting as collective narcissism and social dominance. This results in symbolic caste assertions in public spaces and digital platforms, promoting regressive attitudes that undermine constitutional morality.
The Court emphasised that legal reforms alone are insufficient. There is a critical need for moral awakening, social re-education, anti-bias training for judiciary and police, and curriculum reforms to challenge caste-based narratives. Public policies should regulate caste symbols and promote inter-caste harmony.
Ultimately, the Court called for proactive, sustained government programmes beyond affirmative action, focusing on education, awareness, and social reform to dismantle caste prejudices and realize constitutional ideals of equality, fraternity, and a caste-less society.
The Court expressed its dissatisfaction with the justification provided by the Director General of Police. It observed that the DGP, rooted in a limited third-world perspective, lacked adequate understanding of India’s complex social realities and the constitutional values essential for professional policing. Despite holding the highest police office in the state, he remained detached from constitutional morality and ultimately retired as little more than a bureaucrat in uniform.
The Court gave the following recommendations:
-
Ban caste identifiers and slogans on vehicles: Amend Central Motor Vehicle Rules (‘CMVR’) to explicitly prohibit caste-based markings on all public and private vehicles. Issue uniform circulars to RTOs and traffic departments enforcing removal and impose heavy fines as deterrents.
-
Regulate caste-glorifying digital content: Strengthen provisions under IT rules to identify and act against caste-based hate content on social media. Promote media literacy and anti-caste campaigns targeting youth on platforms like Instagram, YouTube, and WhatsApp.
-
Set up citizen reporting mechanisms: Collaborate with MoRTH, MeitY, Press Council, and civil society groups to create anonymous reporting portals and apps for caste-based violations.
The Court gave the following directions for Uttar Pradesh Government:
-
Remove caste details from all official police records (FIRs, seizure memos, arrest memos, etc.) while adding the mother’s name alongside father’s/husband’s name for identification.
-
Delete caste columns from police station notice boards.
-
Remove caste-glorifying signboards in rural and semi-urban areas and prohibit future installations through formal regulation.
-
Frame and implement Standard Operating Procedures (‘SOPs’) to enforce these guidelines and amend police manuals accordingly.
-
Exempt mentioning caste only where legally required, such as cases under SC/ST (Atrocities) Act.
The Court clarified that the aforementioned directions shall apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of Uttar Pradesh and are optional for the Central Government.
[Praveen Chetri v. State of UP, Application u/S 482 No. – 31545 of 2024, decided on 16-09-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Counsel for Applicant(s): Prashant Sharma, Surendra Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A.
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
