Mentor’s Comment:  The Supreme Court’s questioning of habitual offender laws highlights their colonial origins and continued misuse against Denotified Tribes, raising concerns about constitutional validity and human rights. Despite the repeal of the Criminal Tribes Act in 1952, similar state laws persist, leading to discrimination. The UN and human rights bodies urge India to repeal them. 

This issue is crucial for GS-2 (Governance & Social Justice), GS-3 (Internal Security), and Ethics, showcasing the need for legal reforms to balance security with civil liberties.

_

Let’s learn!

Why in the News?

Recently, the Supreme Court of India has questioned the need for old laws that label some criminals as “habitual offenders.

What has the Supreme Court of India said about the classification of “habitual offenders”?

• Constitutional Suspect & Targeting of Denotified Tribes – In October 2023, the Supreme Court of India questioned the very basis of the “habitual offender” classification, calling it “constitutionally suspect” and stating that it was being used to target members of denotified tribes unfairly. Example: The SC pointed out that in states like Rajasthan, prison manuals explicitly referred to denotified tribes as “habitual offenders”, perpetuating historical discrimination.
• Whole Communities Cannot Be Criminalized – The Court emphasized that no entire community should be labeled as criminals, just as was done under the colonial-era Criminal Tribes Act (CTA) of 1871, which was repealed in 1952. Example: The SC noted that habitual offender laws essentially replaced the CTA, reinforcing stereotypes against denotified tribes and nomadic groups.
• Urged States to Review and Repeal the Laws – While deciding a case on caste discrimination in prisons, the SC urged state governments to review whether such laws were necessary and ensure that they are not used for social discrimination. Example: In response, Punjab and Odisha stated they had not implemented the law in over five years, and Andhra Pradesh reported that no prisoners were classified under it.

Why were certain communities historically criminalized under colonial laws like the Criminal Tribes Act of 1871?

• Colonial Control & Surveillance – The British classified certain nomadic and tribal communities as “criminal tribes” to maintain strict surveillance and control over mobile populations they saw as a threat to law and order. These groups did not conform to settled agricultural lifestyles, making them difficult to regulate. Example: The Lambada (Banjara) community, traditionally nomadic traders, were branded as criminals to restrict their movement.
• Perceived Threat to British Interests – Many of these communities had been warriors, rebels, or supporters of local rulers who resisted British rule. The British saw them as a security threat and sought to suppress their influence. Example: The Thuggee suppression campaign led to the criminalization of Thuggee gangs, whom the British accused of organized robbery and ritual killings, justifying mass arrests and executions.
• Economic & Labor Exploitation – By labeling entire communities as criminal, the British forced them into state surveillance systems, making it easier to recruit them for low-wage, bonded labor. Many were compelled to work under colonial infrastructure projects.Example: Members of the Domb and Kuruva communities were used for forced labor in road and railway construction.
• Social & Racial Stereotyping – The British imposed their own racial biases, believing certain castes and tribes were inherently criminal or “born criminals.” They institutionalized these stereotypes in official records, further marginalizing these groups. Example: The Sansis and Pardhis, historically hunter-gatherers, were deemed criminal simply because of their alternative livelihoods.
• Weakening Indigenous Resistance & Policing Society – The act helped British authorities justify mass surveillance, arrests, and forced resettlement, weakening traditional structures of self-governance and making people more dependent on the colonial system. Example: The Kolis in western India, once involved in anti-British uprisings, were listed as habitual offenders, stripping them of economic and political power.

How have international organizations like the United Nations responded to India’s habitual offender laws?

• UN Special Rapporteurs’ Criticism (2021-2022): UN Special Rapporteurs on Contemporary Forms of Racism and Minority Issues have criticized India’s habitual offender laws for disproportionately targeting certain marginalized communities, such as Denotified Tribes (DNTs).
  • They have highlighted that these laws perpetuate colonial-era stigmatization and violate international human rights principles.
• Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the UNHRC (2017, 2022): India’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) has featured discussions on the criminalization of DNTs and the misuse of habitual offender laws.
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Concerns: The UN Human Rights Committee, which oversees compliance with the ICCPR, has expressed concerns that habitual offender laws violate fundamental rights, including protection from arbitrary detention (Article 9) and non-discrimination (Article 26). 
  • Example: The Committee has asked India to review laws that enable police to harass and surveil individuals based on past convictions rather than actual offenses.
• UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) Recommendations: The CERD has criticized habitual offender laws for reinforcing caste-based and ethnic discrimination, particularly against nomadic and semi-nomadic tribes. 
  • Example: The CERD has urged India to repeal these laws and introduce policies that protect the rights of Denotified Tribes instead of labeling them as criminals.
• Reports by UN Agencies and Human Rights Organizations: Reports by UNICEF and the OHCHR (Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) have highlighted how habitual offender laws restrict freedom of movement and socio-economic opportunities for affected communities. 
  • Example: Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International have also supported UN recommendations, calling for legal reforms to eliminate discrimination against DNTs and other marginalized groups.

Way forward: 

• Legal Reforms & Repeal of Habitual Offender Laws: States should review and repeal habitual offender laws that disproportionately target Denotified Tribes (DNTs) and marginalized groups. The government should enact rehabilitation policies to ensure socio-economic inclusion instead of criminal surveillance.
• Human Rights-Based Approach & Community Integration: Need to Implement affirmative action programs for DNTs, including access to education, employment, and legal aid.

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now