JUDGMENT : Mahendra Kumar Goyal, J. 1. In the S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15266/2020; Bharat Lal @ Bharti vs. State of Rajasthan, this Court has, vide order dated 10.12.2020, directed the learned Public Prosecutor to procure the case diary as well as the criminal antecedents of the petitioner. On next date i.e. on 18.12.2020, learned Public Prosecutor was again granted opportunity to procure the criminal antecedents of the petitioner. 2. In S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15579/2020; Hansram vs. State of Rajasthan, this Court has, vide order dated 18.12.2020, directed the learned Public Prosecutor to procure the case diary as well as the criminal antecedents of the petitioner. Today, in pursuance of the directions issued by this Court, learned Public Prosecutor has produced the case diary as well as the status report dated 03.01.2021 which is taken on record. The status report furnished by the SHO, Police Station Sewar, district Bharatpur contains criminal antecedents of accused-petitioner Bharat Lal @ Bharti only without any information as to criminal antecedents of accused Hansram. Even the report as to criminal antecedents of accused-petitioner Bharat Lal @ Bharti is incomplete. As per the status report, the accused-petitioner Bharat Lal @ Bharti has following criminal cases registered against him: S.No. Case No. Offence Sections Police Station Charge-sheet No. 1. 168/13 323, 341, 34 IPC PS Nagar, Bharatpur 65/23.04.13 2. 390/17 323, 341, 336 IPC PS Nagar, Bharatpur 279/19.12.17 3. 338/2000 323, 341 IPC PS Nagar, Bharatpur 129/31.08.01 4. 322/2018 149, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC PS Bhusawar, Bharatpur 236/27.10.20 5. 325/2018 149, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC PS Bhusawar, Bharatpur 237/27.10.20 6. 326/2018 149, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC PS Bhusawar, Bharatpur 56/29.03.19 7. 463/2018 149, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC PS Bhusawar, Bharatpur 83/18.04.19 8. 603/2018 149, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC PS Bhusawar, Bharatpur 238/27.10.20 9. 323/2018 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC PS Bhusawar, Bharatpur However, as per the bail orders of accused-petitioner Bharat Lal @ Bharti, placed on record by the petitioner along with memo of the bail application, following criminal cases are also registered against him. S.No. FIR No. Offence Sections Police Station 1. 632/2018 420, 406, 120B IPC Hindaun City, District Karauli 2. 351/2018 420, 406, 149, 120B IPC Hindaun City, District Karauli 3. 301/2018 420, 406, 120B IPC Mahawa, District Dausa 4. S.No. FIR No. Offence Sections Police Station 1. 632/2018 420, 406, 120B IPC Hindaun City, District Karauli 2. 351/2018 420, 406, 149, 120B IPC Hindaun City, District Karauli 3. 301/2018 420, 406, 120B IPC Mahawa, District Dausa 4. 321/2018 420, 406, 120B, 506 IPC Todabhim, District Karauli 5. 302/2018 420, 406, 120B IPC Mahawa, District Dausa 6. 327/2018 420, 406, 120B IPC Mahawa, District Dausa 7. 324/2018 420, 406, 120B, 506 IPC Todabhim, District Karauli All these aforesaid criminal cases are not mentioned in the criminal record furnished by the learned Public Prosecutor with the Court today. 3. In so far as criminal record of accused Hansram is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has about 12 other criminal cases of similar nature pending against him. 4. This Court comes across such instances almost daily wherein the record of the criminal antecedents of the accused-petitioners furnished by the learned Public Prosecutor is incomplete. This Court has, on earlier occasions, directed learned GA cum AAG as well as learned AAG representing the Department of Home, Government of Rajasthan to ensure that criminal antecedents of the accused persons furnished for perusal of the Court represent correct and complete picture and they have in turn instructed the authorities; but, of no avail. In this regard, reference may be made to the following communications:- 5. Learned GA cum AAG vide email dated October 1, 2020 addressed to the ADGP, Crime Branch, instructed as under: "Sir, In all criminal cases like Criminal Misc. Bail Applications [438 and 439 Cr.P.C.] Cr. Misc. Petition [482 Cr.P.C.] Cr. Appeal [SB] and [DB] Criminal Revision Petition, Criminal Writ Petition [under Article 226/227 of Constitution of India] Criminal Writ Petition [Parole], whenever criminal antecedents (APARADHIK RECORD] is called by this office as per direction of Hon'ble High Court or case diaries are sent with factual report of case in regard to accused person, the criminal antecedents [APARADHIK RECORD] is sent by the concerned Police Station in an incomplete manner which does not show how many criminal cases are pending against accused in how much cases he has been released after conviction and in how much cases are under trial. Under such circumstances, at the time of hearing before Hon'ble Court the office is unable to express the criminal antecedents of accused before Hon'ble Court. Under such circumstances, at the time of hearing before Hon'ble Court the office is unable to express the criminal antecedents of accused before Hon'ble Court. It is requested you to kindly issue instructions to all the police stations to send complete criminal antecedents bifurcating all the details relating to accused person. Convey the instruction issued to all the police stations to this office. Government Advocate-cum-AAG." He, again, vide email December 9, 2020 addressed to the ADGP, Crime Branch, instructed as under: "Sir, Matter pertains to earlier directions delivered to all the Police Commissioner Jaipur/Jodhpur, All SPs Rajasthan along with GRP Ajmer/Jodhpur vide letter No. 9877-9928 dated 10.11.2020 by you. Now the Hon'ble High Court at Jodhpur in SB Cr. Misc. Bail Application No. 13513/2020 Jugal vs. State of Rajasthan the Hon'ble Court has observed vide order dated 25-11-2020: Thus, this court directs that in all criminal cases of regular/anticipatory bail applications of any accused person to give the complete details of the antecedents, if any, and also record that there are no antecedents of accused person in case of not being there, if there are antecedents of accused, then the complete details of antecedents i.e. F.I.R. No. and case numbers, sections, dates, status and date of arrest, and release on any previous occasion, if any. All the details should be in a chart form by preparing and incorporating details of granting or dismissal of bail application etc. As our earlier letter delivered to you as well as directions issued by you to all concerned authorities, the concerned police stations are not enclosing the details as sought by our office and now in light of aforementioned order of Hon'ble Court, it is requested you to kindly again circulate the guidelines of Hon'ble Court and in future the all concerns authorities will make available the complete detailed of criminal antecedents in a chart form as mentioned about. It is also advised you to direct all concern that whenever bail applications/criminal misc. petition or whatever criminal cases listed in the Hon'ble Court the required information should reach the office without any further delay. It is requested you to issue necessary instructions to all authorities and to inform the office of undersigned. It is also advised you to direct all concern that whenever bail applications/criminal misc. petition or whatever criminal cases listed in the Hon'ble Court the required information should reach the office without any further delay. It is requested you to issue necessary instructions to all authorities and to inform the office of undersigned. Government Advocate-cum-AAG." Similarly, the learned AAG representing the Department of Home has, vide his letter dated 09.12.2020 addressed to Director General of Police & Additional Director General of Police, Police Headquarter instructed as under:- "Sir, With reference to the above, I bring it your kind knowledge that the Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 25.11.2020 had directed all the Public Prosecutors working across the state to call for the antecedents reports of the accused in advance so as to enable the courts to have definitive and clear information regarding the criminal record of the accused. I was called by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mahendra Goyal J. today and orally told that the aforementioned order dated 25.11.2020 is not being followed in its true spirit. In light of the above, I request you to kindly direct all the Investigating Officers to mention the antecedents of the accused clearly and unequivocally in the Case Diary to be sent to the High Court and/or to the trial court and send and advance copy of the same to the Public Prosecutor concerned handling the case in the High Court or the trial court, as the case may be. This may kindly be treated as most urgent and I request you to kindly revert to me regarding this within three days from the receipt of this letter. For necessary action." 6. The importance of criminal antecedents of an accused, while considering his bail application, is no more res integra. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held in the following cases as under: In Prahlad Singh Bhati vs. NCT, Delhi (2001) 4 SCC 280 , it was held as under: 8. "The jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of well settled principles having regard to the circumstances of each case and not in an arbitrary manner. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held in the following cases as under: In Prahlad Singh Bhati vs. NCT, Delhi (2001) 4 SCC 280 , it was held as under: 8. "The jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of well settled principles having regard to the circumstances of each case and not in an arbitrary manner. While granting the bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character, behavior, means and standing of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public or State and similar other considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purposes of granting the bail the Legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not excepted, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt." In State and Ors. vs. Amarmani Tripathi and Ors. (2005) 8 SCC 21 , the Hon'ble Apex Court held: "15. It is well settled that the matters to be considered in an application for bail are (i) whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the charge; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of accused absconding or fleeing if released on bail; (v) character, behavior, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail. While a vague allegation that accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses may not be a ground to refuse bail, if the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or if there is material to show that he will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence, then bail will be refused." In Neeru Yadav vs. State of U.P. and Ors., AIR 2015 SC 3703 , the Hon'ble Apex Court held: "13. We will be failing in our duty if we do not take note of the concept of liberty and its curtailment by law. It is an established fact that a crime though committed against an individual, in all cases it does not retain an individual character. It, on occasions and in certain offences, accentuates and causes harm to the society. The victim may be an individual, but in the ultimate eventuate, it is the society which is the victim. A crime, as is understood, creates a dent in the law and order situation. In a civilised society, a crime disturbs orderliness. It affects the peaceful life of the society. An individual can enjoy his liberty which is definitely of paramount value but he cannot be a law unto himself. He cannot cause harm to others. He cannot be a nuisance to the collective. He cannot be a terror to the society; and that is why Edmund Burke, the great English thinker, almost two centuries and a decade back eloquently spoke thus: Men are qualified for civil liberty, in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites; in proportion as their love to justice is above their rapacity; in proportion as their soundness and sobriety of understanding is above their vanity and presumption; in proportion as they are more disposed to listen to the counsel of the wise and good, in preference to the flattery of knaves. Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters. 14. Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters. 14. E. Barrett Prettyman, a retired Chief Judge of US Court of Appeals had to state thus: In an ordered society of mankind there is no such thing as unrestricted liberty, either of nations or of individuals. Liberty itself is the product of restraints; it is inherently a composite of restraints; it dies when restraints are withdrawn. Freedom, I say, is not an absence of restraints; it is a composite of restraints. There is no liberty without order. There is no order without systematised restraint. Restraints are the substance without which liberty does not exist. They are the essence of liberty. The great problem of the democratic process is not to strip men of restraints merely because they are restraints. The great problem is to design a system of restraints which will nurture the maximum development of man's capabilities, not in a massive globe of faceless animations but as a perfect realisation, of each separate human mind, soul and body; not in mute, motionless meditation but in flashing, thrashing activity. 15. This being the position of law, it is clear as cloudless sky that the High Court has totally ignored the criminal antecedents of the accused. What has weighed with the High Court is the doctrine of parity. A history-sheeter involved in the nature of crimes which we have reproduced hereinabove, are not minor offences so that he is not to be retained in custody, but the crimes are of heinous nature and such crimes, by no stretch of imagination, can be regarded as jejune. Such cases do create a thunder and lightening having the effect potentiality of torrential rain in an analytical mind. The law expects the judiciary to be alert while admitting these kind of accused persons to be at large and, therefore, the emphasis is on exercise of discretion judiciously and not in a whimsical manner." 7. The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has, in the case of Vijay Kumar Meena vs. State, 2008 (4) RLW 3041, held as under: 3. The law expects the judiciary to be alert while admitting these kind of accused persons to be at large and, therefore, the emphasis is on exercise of discretion judiciously and not in a whimsical manner." 7. The Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court has, in the case of Vijay Kumar Meena vs. State, 2008 (4) RLW 3041, held as under: 3. "Although pendency of a criminal case as such may not always be a bar for grant of bail, but if it is shown that in spite of indulgence repeatedly shown by the Court, an accused has been continuously misusing such liberty and involving himself time and again in similar and other nature of offences, this may by itself be a reason for refusal of bail. And that can be done if the Court on the basis of material on record is satisfied that the accused has been repeatedly involving himself in so large number of cases arid at such regular intervals, that he can be safely treated as a habitual offender. Grant of bail no doubt is an issue which concerns the liberty of a citizen. But at the same time, if an accused is shown to frequently and habitually indulge himself in commission of crimes one after the other and becomes a menace to the society, that liberty is required to be balanced against the larger interest of the society. Apart from merits of the case, when it is shown that he has been committing offences with impunity in such a manner that letting him free would again expose the society to the offences that such habitual offender might again commit, the bail application of such an accused can be refused on consideration of his antecedents alone." 8. Recently, this Court has, in the case of Jugal vs. State of Rajasthan, S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13513/2020 vide order dated 25.11.2020, 2020 (4) RLW 3386, underlining the importance of criminal antecedents of an accused for the purpose of consideration of his bail application, directed as under: "Thus, this Court directs that all learned trial courts shall, while allowing or disallowing any regular/anticipatory bail application of any accused person, give the complete details of the antecedents, if any, and also record that there are no antecedents of the accused person in case of none being there. If there are antecedents of the accused, then the complete details of the antecedents i.e. F.I.R. Number(s) & Case Number(s), Section(s), date(s), status and date of arrest & release on any previous occasion, if any, in the chart form shall be prepared and incorporated in the learned trial courts' order, while granting or dismissing the bail application." This Court directed strict compliance of the aforesaid direction upto 05.01.2021. 9. It goes without saying that for the purpose of criminal record of an accused, the Court is dependent on the information furnished by the investigating agency. It is sorry state of affairs that in spite of repeated requests/directions of the Court/concerned authorities, still, incomplete reports as to criminal antecedents of the accused persons are being furnished. The Law Commission of India has also, in its Report No. 268 regarding Amendments to Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 in provisions relating to bail, recommended as under: "11.24 The criminal justice system in India is on the path of scale up its criminal data gathering, data analytics and data-sharing capabilities. Although criminal antecedents can be discovered through a record of F.I.R. and judgments, both of which can be found online, however, the information is piecemeal and not easily accessible. For instance, the Court, prosecutors and the police should be able to triangulate information about a person accused of an offence, in order to enable them to proceed expeditiously and efficiently. 11.25 The technical architecture of the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS) scheme may be adapted and utilized to ensure that the person accused of an offence does mark his appearance, by taking a picture and/or his fingerprints, name, father's name, mother's name, spouse's name, address, date of birth, mobile number, contact number, driving license, voter ID, Aadhaar number and criminal history, if any. The Delhi High Court, in the past has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation to start a cell on criminal records of abductors and kidnappers. Such kind of extra judicial developments may be used as a catalyst to set up national criminal databases, link various investigating agencies and judiciary. These links may call for the active involvement of the Ministry of Home Affairs, facilitated by various state and national authorities. Such kind of extra judicial developments may be used as a catalyst to set up national criminal databases, link various investigating agencies and judiciary. These links may call for the active involvement of the Ministry of Home Affairs, facilitated by various state and national authorities. In such manner, decision making of the Courts, public prosecutors, the investigation agencies and various other authorities that perform key functions in upholding the law and deliver justice would aid in their functioning." 10. In these circumstances, this Court is left with no option; but, to direct the Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Rajasthan as well as the Director General of Police, State of Rajasthan, Jaipur to file their affidavit explaining the mechanism that has been devised for constitution of necessary data bank containing criminal antecedents of an accused along with other details as directed by this Court in case of Jugal (supra) to remain available with each and every Police Station in the State of Rajasthan so as to ensure compliance of the direction issued in the case of Jugal (supra) in letter and spirit. The requisite affidavit be filed on or before next date of hearing. 11. SHO, Police Station Sewar is directed to remain present in this Court along with his affidavit as to status of criminal antecedents of the present petitioners as well as his explanation as to its omission in the status report dated 03.01.2021 as pointed out hereinabove. List these matters on 13.01.2021. A copy of this order be made available in the office of learned GA cum AAG as well as Dr. V.B. Sharma, learned AAG under the signature of the Court Master immediately for necessary information and compliance.