The Allahabad High Court directed the UP government to prohibit caste disclosure in police records (except under the SC/ST Act), remove caste identifiers from vehicles and strengthen action against caste-glorifying social media content.
The court strongly criticised the DGP’s justification for recording caste, calling it detached from “the complex realities of Indian society,” and stressed that such practices undermine constitutional morality and professional policing.
The Allahabad High Court has directed the state’s Home Department and the DGP to frame and implement standard operating procedures—by amending police manuals or regulations if necessary—to prohibit caste disclosure in all police records, except in cases filed under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The court also observed that the justification presented by the DGP was detached from “the complex realities of Indian society and the demands of professional policing.”
In a detailed order, Justice Vinod Diwakar further recommended that the government create a framework to regulate or amend the Central Motor Vehicles Rules to prohibit the display of caste names or caste-based slogans on both private and public vehicles. The order directed the RTO and traffic department to remove such identifiers and impose heavy penalties.
The court also asked the government to strengthen provisions under the IT Act to detect and act against content on social media that glorifies caste or fuels hatred.
The directions came during a hearing on a petition filed by three persons arrested on April 29, 2023, in Etawah for allegedly smuggling liquor in an SUV. While their plea to quash the FIR and legal proceedings was dismissed, the court took note of the police mentioning their castes in the FIR and investigation report.
On March 3, the court had instructed the DGP to submit a personal affidavit explaining the requirement and relevance of recording caste in FIRs and investigations, particularly in a caste-sensitive society where social divisions continue to shape law enforcement and public perception.
In its order delivered Tuesday and uploaded Saturday, the court noted, “The DGP’s affidavit emphasised three key justifications: first, the identification of the accused by caste name is done to avoid any confusion about the identity of the accused; second, the contents of the formats (annexed with the affidavit) may be amended either by the Union Government or the National Crime Records Bureau; and third, the police do not discriminate with accused persons on the basis of their caste or religion and conduct the investigation as per the procedure established by law. So far as the caste is concerned, the police (use a) scientific method of investigation (and caste) has no impact on the psyche of the law enforcement agencies.”
However, the High Court rejected this reasoning, stating, “The court is not impressed with the justification offered by the Director General of Police. In the court’s view, the DGP… appears to have little exposure to the complex realities of Indian society and the demands of professional policing. True legal and professional acumen necessarily requires an understanding of society – its nature, its functioning, and its constitutional values. Yet, despite holding the state’s highest police office, he conducted himself like an ivory-tower policeman, detached from constitutional morality, and eventually retired merely as a bureaucrat in uniform.”
The order further observed, “Recording the caste of the accused as Mali, Pahadi Rajput, Thakur, Punjabi Parashar, and Brahmin in the impugned FIR and seizure memo serves no lawful or legitimate purpose. What is truly unfortunate is that rather than recommending a departmental inquiry or ensuring the officer undergoes sensitisation on constitutional morality and social concerns, the conduct was defended on vague and unsustainable grounds.”
The court said such insensitivity at the highest police level forced it to engage in a “deeper deliberation on the larger issue of caste-based prejudices,” leading to recommendations for central authorities and binding directions to the UP government.
Highlighting the social context, it noted, “In the northern part of India — in states like Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Punjab, Rajasthan, and parts of Madhya Pradesh and Bihar — individuals commonly mark their cars, bikes, and sometimes homes with caste identifiers. Vehicles (are) adorned with caste emblems, slogans, or even warnings. The rise of digital platforms like Instagram, YouTube Shorts, and Facebook Reels has given young caste-identified individuals a platform for performance. These reels often romanticise caste aggression and dominance, rural masculinity, and regressive honour codes.”
The court added, “The socio-psychological, cultural, and legal dimensions of such behaviour reveal how the assertion of caste in public domains undermines constitutional morality and reflects an identity crisis rooted in historical superiority and modern insecurity. Social media becomes an echo chamber for hyper-masculine caste identity and historical revisionism (e.g., glorifying feudal lords or caste-based political leaders). It promotes a toxic digital masculinity rooted in caste, weaponising tradition in a postmodern format…”
The Registrar (Compliance) has been directed to send a copy of the order to the Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh, who must place it before the Chief Minister.
The order clarified that while the directions are binding in Uttar Pradesh, they remain optional for the central government since it was not a party before the court. The UP government has also been instructed to remove caste/tribe entry columns from all police formats and include the mother’s name alongside the father’s and husband’s names.
The order concluded, “It is learnt that a notice board installed at all police stations in UP carries a caste column against the name of the accused; the government shall issue an appropriate order to delete (erase) the same with immediate effect.”
(with inputs from The Indian Express)
