It said “all the state governments are therefore expected to take necessary preventive measures to safeguard such communities from being subjected to inexcusable targeting or prejudicial treatment”.

“We must bear in mind that these preconceived notions often render them “invisible victims” due to prevailing stereotypes associated with their communities, which may often impede their right to live a life with self-respect,” the bench noted.

The court said this while deciding a plea by AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, challenging the ‘history sheet’ opened against him and the proposal to declare him “bad character” with the entry of his name in the surveillance register at Jamia Nagar police station in south-east Delhi.

The Delhi HC had earlier dismissed the petition following which the MLA approached the SC.

Rejecting his prayer against the ‘history sheet’, the SC, however, directed the police to make sure that the details of his minor children and wife are not reflected in it.

During the hearing, it was conveyed to the Delhi police that there are some disturbing contents of the ‘history sheet’ which pertained to Khan’s school-going minor children and his wife, against whom there was apparently no adverse material whatsoever.

The Delhi police said the format for ‘history sheeters’ was in accordance with rules made in 1934 and that it would revisit the same to ensure that the dignity, self-respect and privacy of innocent people, who incidentally happen to be the family members of a suspect, are not compromised at any cost.

Accordingly, the Delhi Police Commissioner issued a Standing Order on March 21, 2024.

The bench noted that as per this, the “identities of only those persons shall be reflected who can afford the history sheeter/bad character shelter, when the offender is running/wanted by the police and it shall also include names of his associates in crime, abettors and receivers” and that “no details of any minor relatives, i.e., son, daughter, siblings shall be recorded anywhere in the history sheet unless there is evidence that such minor, has or earlier had, afforded shelter to the offender”.

It also mandated that Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 shall be meticulously followed, which prohibits disclosing the identity of a child in conflict with law or a child in need of care and protection or a child victim or a witness of a crime through a report etc.

“The amended Standing Order further clarifies that ‘history sheet’ is an internal police document and not a publicly accessible report. It has cautioned the police officers that care must be taken to ensure that identities of only those minor relatives are entered in the history sheet against whom evidence exists that such minor had earlier afforded shelter to the offender, while he was on the run from the police. The safeguard with regard to the details of phone numbers, Aadhar Card, EPIC number, e-mail I.D., social media accounts etc., have also been suggested in the amended Standing Order”, the SC said.

As regards Khan’s case, the SC directed the police authorities to give effect to the amended Standing Order of March 21 forthwith.

The SC also directed the Commissioner of Police, Delhi to designate a senior police officer, in the rank of Joint Commissioner of Police or above, who shall periodically audit/review the contents of the history sheets and ensure confidentiality and a leeway to delete the names of such persons/ juvenile/ children who are, in the course of investigation, found innocent and are entitled to be expunged from the category of “relations and connections in a history sheet”.

It asked all the States and Union Territories “to revisit their policy-regime and consider whether suitable amendments on the pattern of the ‘Delhi Model’ are required to be made so that our observations…can be given effect in true letter and spirit”.