Allahabad High Court Summons Agra Police Officers Over Lawyer’s House Arrest During Administrative Judge’s Visit

The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday summoned two police officers from Agra over the alleged house arrest of a 70-year-old lawyer, Mahatab Singh, during an administrative judge’s visit to the District and Sessions Court in November 2024.

The Court expressed serious concerns over the incident and sought an explanation from the Agra Police Commissioner regarding the rationale behind the action.

The Division Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Donadi Ramesh noted that administrative judges’ visits to district courts are routine affairs and questioned the legality of restricting a lawyer’s movement based on such an event.

The Court highlighted that Singh was scheduled to appear in 15 cases before the Sessions Division on the day he was allegedly detained at home.

“It would be a sad day if a lawyer practicing in District Court is not allowed to attend the Court on account of restrictions put by the police authorities over the movements only because the administrative judge is to visit the Court. We are of the considered view that the issue needs to be probed further,” the Bench observed.

Advocate Sandeep Mishra appeared for the Petitioner.

Court Seeks Justification from Police

The Court directed the Agra Police Commissioner to file a personal affidavit explaining the rationale behind serving notice to Singh under Section 168 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and maintaining surveillance over him. The affidavit must also clarify the police's policy regarding monitoring lawyers' movements during administrative judges' visits and provide records of similar actions taken in the past.

The police had justified their actions by citing a criminal case registered against Singh in 1988. However, the Court noted that the case pertained to an incident within the court premises involving 40–50 lawyers and questioned its relevance to the present situation.

The Court directed the Commissioner of Police to furnish records of any similar action taken against Singh in the last 10 years. It further summoned the Deputy Commissioner of Police and the concerned police official responsible for recommending action against Singh to appear before the Court on March 18.

“The concerned police official on whose report the action was taken against the petitioner shall also remain present before the Court along with records. The Deputy Commissioner of Police of the concerned zone, who was the highest authority allegedly kept informed of the matter, shall also remain present. This direction is required to ascertain whether such action of police is a part of routine exercise or is it a singular case of its own. We also want to know who exactly ordered action against the petitioner,” the Court stated.

Incident Linked to Lawyers’ Protest

The controversial action against Singh took place on November 15, 2024, during a two-day visit by the administrative judge to Agra. Singh was allegedly detained at home from 6 AM to 4 PM, with police attempting to restrict his movements even the following day.

According to reports, four police officers arrived at Singh’s residence, citing an oral directive from the District and Sessions Judge of Agra that he should remain confined to his house until the administrative judge left the district. The action coincided with the circulation of a leaflet by the Bar Association, informing the administrative judge about issues faced by lawyers in the District Court.

The High Court had previously observed that administrative judges often interact with lawyers to assess the functioning of the District Judiciary. Any interference by the State in this process could seriously impair the administration of justice.

District Judge Denies Prior Knowledge of Police Action

In response to the Court’s queries, the senior-most judicial officer of the district submitted a sealed report stating that the police had acted independently based on "reliable information" about a potential obstruction by lawyers.

“The report of the District Judge states that the petitioner was not put under house arrest, but police personnel have admitted that the petitioner was kept under supervision. It is also stated that even the District Judge was not aware of such action of police nor was any permission sought from the District Judge. The comments of the District Judge also reveal that the Hon’ble Administrative Judge has also called for an explanation in the matter,” the Court recorded in its March 4 order.

The Court further pointed out discrepancies in the police’s defense, noting that while the Commissioner of Police claimed that officers were at Singh’s residence for only 2-3 minutes to serve a notice, the District Judge’s report confirmed that the lawyer was placed under surveillance.

With the issue raising significant constitutional concerns, the High Court has now sought a detailed explanation and summoned the concerned police officials to determine who authorized the action against Singh. "The Administrative Judge of the district must have visited numerous times during last several decades. We direct the Commissioner of Police to explain and produce records regarding similar action taken against the petitioner during the last ten years," the Court ordered.

The matter will be heard next on March 18.

Cause Title: Mahatab Singh v. State Of Up And 3 Others [Writ C No. 40097 of 2024]

Click here to read/download the Order