'Power to punish is with judiciary': Allahabad HC says can't allow police state in UP

Allahabad High Court

• Allahabad High Court warns against police pressuring judiciary in Uttar Pradesh
• Court says police must not undermine judicial independence or protocol
• DGP assures steps to prevent police interference with judicial officers

Did our AI summary help?

The Allahabad High Court has raised serious concerns over what it described as a recurring pattern of police officers exerting pressure on members of the judiciary in Uttar Pradesh, particularly at the district level.

Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal said the trend threatens the independence of courts and cannot be allowed to continue.

“Power to punish is in the domain of judiciary and not with the police,” the Court underscored.

The observations were made during a hearing in which Director General of Police (DGP) Rajiv Krishna and Additional Chief Secretary (Home) Sanjay Prasad were asked to appear via video conference. They were called upon to explain steps being taken to address the increasing instances of police personnel shooting accused in their legs.

Addressing the officers, Justice Deshwal remarked, “Dekhiye isko na police State nai banane dena [See, we can't allow this to become a police State].”

Pattern of pressure across district courts

Justice Deshwal stated that he had received consistent feedback indicating that judicial officers, including chief judicial magistrates (CJMs), were being pressured to pass particular orders.

“Each and every district, law is not being followed. I have not come across a single case where law or direction of the apex court has been followed. Sometimes, this has become a bone of contention, a dispute between the district police chief and judicial officer,” the Court said.

The judge noted that disputes often arise when judicial officers seek explanations from police for non-compliance with legal procedures.

“This [has] became a routine feature that the SP starts pressurising the judicial officer for a particular order,” he added.

Justice Deshwal disclosed that in one instance, “just to stop this tussle”, a CJM had to be shifted, while clarifying that the issue was not confined to any single district.

“It is not about a particular district. In most of the districts, I got feedback from district judges that especially young police officers, being IPS officers, start pressurising judicial officers. If they are not satisfied, they can file revision before the district judge or challenge the order.”

The Court also said it had received inputs from bar association leaders that senior police officers sometimes enter courtrooms and exert pressure on presiding judges.

Protocol and mutual respect

Stressing the importance of institutional boundaries, Justice Deshwal said police officers must not view themselves as superior to members of the judiciary.

“Once a judicial officer is sitting on the dais, he may be a junior division officer, he is above all persons in front of him,” the Court said.

The judge also revealed that he had instructed trial court judges not to rise from the dais when he visits on inspection, explaining, “At that time, in protocol, he is above to me.”

DGP Krishna assured the Court that directions would be issued to ensure proper protocol is followed.

“Majesty of law is supreme, there is no doubt about that,” he said, adding that police must function strictly within legal limits.

The Court said that ego clashes between police and judicial officers would only harm the justice delivery system and, ultimately, the public.