Recklessly Violated Most Fundamental Essence Of Article 21: Allahabad High Court Asks State To Pay Rs 35,000 For Illegal Detention In Police Custody

The High Court was considering a case of illegal detention.

The Division Bench of Justice Sanjiv Kumar and Justice J.J. Munir held, “Here all that we are concerned with is a question of the petitioner's right to liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution in its most nascent form. We are convinced that Dubey has recklessly violated the most fundamental essence of this most valuable fundamental right by dragging the petitioner out of his home on the basis of a complaint, he was not authorized to act upon, and, then, carrying the petitioner away in custody, first to the police outpost, Baraut and then confining him in the police lockup at Police Station Handia from 26.11-2022 to 27.11.2022 without the authority of law.”

“In the totality of circumstances, we hold that the petitioner was illegally deprived of his liberty by Dubey, a police officer, in the colour of exercise of authority of the State, and for the aforesaid act, the petitioner must be given monetary recompense. We think that ends of justice would be met, if the State are ordered to pay the petitioner for his illegal detention in police custody from 26.11.2022 to 27.11.2022, a total sum of Rs.25,000/- together with costs in the sum of Rs.10,000/-”, it ordered.

Advocate Mata Achal Mishra represented the Petitioner, while Government Advocate represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The case as presented by the petitioner was that he was living at Mehmoorganj in the district of Varanasi and had come over to his native village Sidhwar to look after his agricultural property located there. It was alleged that on November 26, 2022, when the petitioner came home after returning from his paddy crop fields, the then In-charge Police Outpost Baraut, entered the petitioner's house, dragged him out of his house and carried him off to the Police Outpost. Thereafter, the petitioner was conveyed to P.S. Handia. On the way to P.S. Handia via Police Outpost Baraut, the petitioner repeatedly asked the reason why he was being taken to the police station, but no reason was disclosed to him.

The case of the petitioner was about his illegal detention in police custody for 24 hours from November 26, 2022, to November 27, 2022, but the relief that the petitioner sought was a mandamus commanding the State of Uttar Pradesh through the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Government of U.P., Lucknow, to ensure an inquiry into the matter by any other superior police officer. There was also one deleted prayer where the petitioner had sought quashing of the inquiry report submitted by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Handia, Prayagraj to the Commissioner of Police, Prayagraj, discarding the petitioner's case of illegal detention.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the police officer acknowledged the fact that there was a complaint against the petitioner by his brother’s daughter-in-law, about domestic violence. It was stated that the petitioner and his daughter-in-law had both come to the police station and mutually compromised the matter without any pressure. The Bench was of the view that if it was a case of domestic violence and nothing more, the Police had little business in the matter unless there was a definitive cognizable offence committed. “Admittedly, that was not…”, it added.

“In these circumstances, there is little cavil that entertaining a complaint of mere domestic violence, Dubey dragged the petitioner to the police outpost and then locked him up at the police station, as the petitioner says, for 24 hours. The petitioner has not given an exaggerated account and it inspires confidence with us. The allegations about Dubey demanding a bribe, we are not inclined to go into. In so far as the last mentioned allegation is concerned it truly goes to the remit of the disciplinary authority or the Police themselves, or may the Vigilance Establishment or the Anti-Corruption Bureau, to examine and determine”, it added.

The Bench held that the petitioner was illegally deprived of his liberty by the police officer, in the colour of exercise of authority of the State, and for the aforesaid act, the petitioner must be given monetary recompense. “In the result, this writ petition succeeds and is allowed with costs, which we quantify in the sum of Rs.10,000/-. Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 are ordered by a mandamus to pay the petitioner ad hoc compensation in the sum of Rs.25,000/- within a period of thirty days of the communication of this order with liberty to recover the sum of this compensation, together with costs, after these have been paid to the petitioner, from Dubey in whatever manner respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 find it appropriate, including recovery from Dubey's remuneration and other funds in the hands of the respondents”, it ordered.

“We think that ends of justice would be met, if the State are ordered to pay the petitioner for his illegal detention in police custody from 26.11.2022 to 27.11.2022, a total sum of Rs.25,000/- together with costs in the sum of Rs.10,000”, it ordered.

Cause Title: Matambar Mishra v. The State of U.P. (Neutral Citation: 2026:AHC:123415-DB)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Mata Achal Mishra, Vinay Mishra

Respondent: Government Advocate

Click here to read/download Order