Centralised police databases such as CCTNS and NAFIS improve crime control but raise concerns of function creep. Discuss the safeguards needed.

Function creep happens when data collected for one purpose slowly gets used for others. CCTNS now runs in all 17,798 police stations across 36 States/UTs [1]. Together with NAFIS, NCRB's national fingerprint database, it forms India's policing data backbone. The gains are real, but without firm safeguards the system can drift into general surveillance.

How they aid crime control

• Linked records: FIRs and criminal records are digital and shared across States, which helps track offenders who move between States [1].
• Faster identification: the Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act, 2022 widens "measurements" to include iris and retina scans, biological samples and behavioural attributes, and NCRB holds these centrally [2].

Concerns of function creep

• Wide net, long memory: data can be taken from anyone arrested, even for minor offences, and kept for 75 years. PRS says this may fail the necessity and proportionality test of Puttaswamy (2017) [3].
• Open-ended sharing: NCRB can share records with law enforcement agencies [2], but no public list says which agencies.
• Self-regulation: NCRB writes its own SOPs on storage, matching and destruction, and it is unclear whether Parliament will ever see them. PRS calls this excessive delegation and cites Siddharth Sarawagi (2014) [4].
• Burden on the citizen: records are destroyed only if the person applies to a nodal officer [4].
• New technology: no specific law governs police facial recognition (FRT). NITI Aayog has called for strict standards on storing and retaining biometric data [5].

Safeguards needed

• Legislative: write purpose limitation into the law, place NCRB's SOPs before Parliament [4], and pass a dedicated law on police FRT [5].
• Proportionate retention: set retention periods by how serious the offence is, instead of a flat 75 years [3].
• Automatic deletion: destroy records on acquittal or release without an application, as the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 already does by having the Board order destruction [4].
• Judicial check: make magistrates record reasons when they order measurements, as the Law Commission recommended in 1980 [3].
• Protecting dissent: enforce the Rules' bar on measuring people held only under Sections 144/145/151 CrPC unless they are charged with another offence [4].
• Audit: keep access logs, set up independent oversight, and have NCRB publish yearly figures on records added and destroyed.

CCTNS and NAFIS are essential to modern policing, but people will trust them only if they meet the tests of legality, necessity and proportionality. Purpose limitation, automatic deletion and parliamentary oversight would let India pursue SMART policing while upholding the privacy and dignity guaranteed by Article 21.