Magistrate, Police Officer Personally Liable To Compensate For Illegal Preventive Detention: Allahabad HC
It is for the first time in my entire life of 51 years till now that I am so happy that is simply boundless to see that none other than the Allahabad High Court which is the biggest High Court in not only just India among all the States, in not only just Asia, in not only just few continents but also in all the continents all over the world in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest judgment titled Chander Pal Singh and another Vs State of U.P. in Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. – 214 of 2026 that was reserved on 26.05.2026 and then finally pronounced on 08.06.2026 has deemed it fit to order the payment of Rs 75,000 to an advocate who was illegally detained for 3 days and directed also the recovery of the amount from the erring official. It is definitely most refreshing to note that the Allahabad High Court has also ordered the UP State Government to pay Rs 25,000 per day to such citizens who are illegally detained beyond 24 hours under the preventive detention provisions of BNSS over alleged breach of peace. While striking the right chord and taking a rap on the knuckles of Magistrate and police officer, the Allahabad High Court strongly criticized the misuse of provisions that pertained to apprehension of breach of peace under the Commissionerate system and minced absolutely just no words to make it indubitably clear that personal liberty is paramount and no innocent citizen can be sent to jail without following due legal process.
For the uninitiated, it must be laid bare that a Division Bench of Allahabad High Court comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Siddharth and Hon’ble Mr Justice Vinai Kumar Dwivedi further directed that this compensation must be recovered directly from the salaries of the erring Magistrates or police officials. In addition, the Division Bench mandated that the Magistrate and the police official, who are prima facie found responsible for the lapse, shall be subjected to disciplinary proceedings for dereliction of duty in accordance with their relevant service Rules. Notably, the Division Bench also directed that no surety should ordinarily be insisted upon for the release of such persons.
By the way, the Division Bench also directed that no surety should ordinarily be insisted upon for the release of such persons. Furthermore, the Division Bench also mandated that the amount of personal bond should not exceed Rs 20,000. We need to note that the Division Bench was dealing with a habeas corpus petition that had been filed by Chander Pal Singh who is an advocate with disabilities practicing before the Allahabad High Court.
At the very outset, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by Hon’ble Mr Justice Siddharth for a Division Bench of Allahabad High Court comprising of himself and Hon’ble Mr Justice Vinai Kumar Dwivedi sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “Heard Sri Rajrshi Gupta and Sri Jitendra Rana, learned counsel for the petitioners; Sri Anoop Trivedi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Mohd. Shoeb Khan, learned AGA-Ist for State-respondents and perused the pleadings of the parties and annexures in support thereof.”
While disclosing the purpose of the writ petition, the Division Bench specifies in para 2 stating that, “This habeas corpus writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-
a. Issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus and/or any other similar writ, order and direction of like nature, directing the respondents to produce the petitioner no.1 before this Hon’ble Court and release the corpus/petitioner no.1 from their illegal detention/arrest/custody to set at liberty.
b. Issue a Writ of Mandamus and/or any other similar writ, order and directing the Police of Police Station Teelamodh, District Commissionerate Ghaziabad, not to illegally harass the Petitioner no. 1 and his family members.
c. Issue any other Writ, Order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the present case.
d. To may award the compensation to the petitioner for the illegal detention/arrest/harassment, and also cost of expenses for present Writ petition.”
Most significantly, the Division Bench encapsulates in para 16 what constitutes the cornerstone of this notable judgment postulating precisely that, “We find that there exists a State Government policy decision dated 23.03.2021. Despite the said policy decision, the police officials of the State and the Magistrates are acting in a highly irresponsible manner by sending persons brought before them, only to prevent breach of peace, to jail for days together. The amount of compensation of 25,000/- for such breach was fixed in the year 2021 by the State Government and it deserves to be enhanced by the State Government by framing a new policy after the coming into force of the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). Until a new policy is brought into force by the State Government and keeping in view flagrant violation of right to liberty of the illegally detained and jailed persons, we direct as follows:-
(i). We hereby direct that after preventive detention of any person under the provisions of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) or Cr.P.C., he shall be required to furnish a personal bond (signature bond without deposit of any money) binding him to keep peace and maintain good behaviour. The amount of such bond shall not exceed 20,000/- and no surety shall be required to be furnished. In case amount of bond is increased, reasons for the same shall be given by the Magistrate in writing. On the date of detention, if bond is executed by the person detained, he shall be set free.
(ii). In case accused refuses to execute the personal bond for keeping peace on being produced before the Magistrate/Commissioner of Police on the same day, his refusal shall be recorded by means of written and audio-visual mode before sending him to jail. He shall be produced before the Magistrate on the date stated by him at the time of his refusal to furnish personal bond to enable him to produce personal bond on the day chosen by him.
(iii). Further, in cases where a person is detained for more than 24 hours in violation of this order, without any plausible reason, an amount of Rs 25,000/- per day shall be payable to the detained person as compensation by the State Government. The said amount shall be recovered by deduction from the salary of the concerned Magistrate and/or police officer, or both, as the case may be, if they are found responsible for the default, after conducting disciplinary proceedings against them and fixing their liability.
(iv). The Magistrate and/or police official prima facie found responsible for the lapse, or both, shall be subjected to disciplinary proceedings for dereliction of duty as per their relevant service Rules.”
To put things in perspective, the Division Bench envisages in para 3 stating succinctly that, “The brief facts of the case are that petitioner no.1-corpus has been illegally detained by police of Police Station Teelamodh by Chowki Incharge of aforesaid police station, namely, Rajendra Singh on 22.2.2026 around 11:00 a.m.; detained illegally for more than 24 hours and produced before Magistrate on 23.2.2026 at 4:00 p.m.”
While elaborating further on the facts of the case, the Division Bench enunciates in para 4 that, “Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner no.1 is a practicing Advocate of this Court and petitioner no.2 is his wife. Both are also handicapped. On 13.2.2026 petitioner no.1 had gone to his native village, Jawli, for attending the marriage of his niece scheduled on 20.2.2026. Unfortunately, on 17.02.2026 brother-in-law of petitioner no.1 expired and his family was shocked. The petitioner no.1 got his ticket reserved by train for returning to Prayagraj in 22.2.2026, but on the same day at 11:00 a.m. he was forcibly taken away by the police of Police Station Teelamodh. He was not produced before any Magistrate within 24 hours, which is violation of law. He was only produced before Assistant Commissioner of Police, Salimar Garden, District Ghaziabad and he was sent to jail under Section 151 Cr.P.C. without permitting him to execute bond for keeping peace. The petitioner no.1 was lodged in a cell at Police Station Teelamodh for whole day alongwith his nephew and it was only on 23.2.2026 that they furnished bond of Rs.50,000/- under Sections 170, 126 and 135 B.N.S.S. Despite execution of bail bonds, petitioner no.1 alongwith his nephew were sent to jail. After the filing of the habeas corpus writ petition and on the oral direction of this Hon’ble Court to the learned A.G.A. to seek instructions, petitioner No. 1 was released from jail on 25.02.2026 at 8:30 a.m., while his nephew was released on the next day, i.e., 26.02.2026, in the morning.”
Delving deeper, the Division Bench then lays bare in para 5 that, “Petitioner no.1 made complaints to the Police Commissioner, Commissionerate Ghaziabad alongwith the District Magistrate and other authorities. The petitioner no.1 was again issued a notice dated 25.03.2026 under Sections 126 and 135 of the B.N.S.S. by the Executive Magistrate, Sahibabad, Commissionerate Ghaziabad, with regard to the incident dated 03.03.2026, in order to exert pressure upon him to withdraw the present habeas corpus writ petition. The petitioner no.1 belongs to SC/ST community and he was subjected to physical and mental harassment alongwith his nephew in most illegal manner by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Salimar Garden, District Commissionerate, Ghaziabad and Station House Officer, Police Station Teelamodh, District Commissionerate, Ghaziabad.”
Be it noted, the Division Bench notes in para 7 that, “This Court passed the order dated 27.4.2026 directing the Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Ghazizbad, to submit the details of illegally detained persons by his orders. In the compliance of aforesaid order, affidavit of compliance has been filed by Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad, stating that no person is now under detention. However his report shows that earlier persons were arrested and detained in jail for number of days. After this Court’s order, they were released from jail to show good work. It has also been stated in the compliance affidavit that Commissioner has ordered inquiry through Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (Crime), Commissionerate Ghaziabad, by his order dated 29.4.2026 as to why petitioner no.1 was detained in police station for more than 24 hours. The inquiry report has been brought on record as Annexure No.5 to the affidavit of compliance. From the aforesaid inquiry report, we do not find any justification for keeping the petitioner in jail despite the execution of the bail bond.”
It is also worth noting that the Division Bench notes in para 15 that, “The provisions of Sections 126 and135 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) vest discretion in the Magistrate to get bond and bail bond executed under Chapter IX B.N.S.S. Section 170 B.N.S.S. does not provides for execution of any bond or furnishing any surety. But we find that bond of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties of like amount, are being illegally insisted by Magistrates whenever such detention/ arrest of a person is made, on the allegation of commission of breach of peace and not maintaining good behaviour.”
It would be instructive to note that the Division Bench then hastens to add in para 17 directing and holding that, “Now coming to the facts of this case, it is clear that petitioner no.1 was illegally detained in jail from 22.3.2026 to 25.3.2026 and was released after filing of this petition on oral direction of this Court. Hence he is held entitled to compensation of Rs.75,000/- at the rate Rs.25,000/- per day of illegal detention. It shall be paid to petitioner no.1 within six weeks by the State Government. Thereafter the amount shall be recovered by the State Government from Assistant Commissioner of Police, Shalimar Garden, Ghaziabad and/or from S.H.O., Police Station Teelamodh, Ghaziabad, whosoever is found at fault or both, proportionally after conducting disciplinary inquiry against both of them within three months.”
Adding more to it, the Division Bench then further directs and holds in para 18 that, “The Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate Ghaziabad, shall file the compliance report of this order to this Court on or before 14.9.2026.”
Finally, the Division Bench then concludes aptly by directing and holding in para 19 that, “List this case on 14.9.2026.”
In a nutshell, there can be just no gainsaying that this most progressive, pragmatic, persuasive, powerful and pertinent judgment by Allahabad High Court deserves to be strictly emulated in all the States to hold Magistrates and police fully, firmly and finally accountable for illegal detention without any prima facie reason. It needs no rocket scientist to conclude that there should be absolute zero tolerance for illegal detention as it is in complete breach of right to life and personal liberty as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution. It has been most commendably held that Magistrates and cops are personally liable to compensate for illegal preventive detention of any person! No denying or disputing!
Author Bio
