The Allahabad High Court summoned Agra police officials for placing a 70-year-old lawyer under house arrest during an administrative judge’s visit, questioning the legality of the action and demanding explanations.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
UTTAR PRADESH: The Allahabad High Court took a strong stance against the house arrest of a 70-year-old lawyer, Mahatab Singh, in Agra during the visit of an administrative judge to the District and Sessions Court in November 2024. The court has now summoned two police officers regarding this incident.
The Division Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Donadi Ramesh pointed out that the visit of an administrative judge to a district court is a routine affair. They found it unheard of that such a visit could be the reason for putting a lawyer under house arrest.
The Court observed that Singh had 15 cases to attend in the Sessions Division on that particular day.
“It would be a sad day if a lawyer practising 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 stated.
To understand the rationale behind this action, the Court directed the Commissioner of Police, Agra, to file a personal affidavit explaining why a notice under Section 168 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) was served to Singh and why he was kept under police supervision.
“The Commissioner of Police will also clarify the policy to monitor and supervise movements of an advocate during visit of Administrative Judge and furnish details of such care and caution resorted to by the District Administration, during previous visits of the Administrative Judge, to the district,”
-the Court further directed.
The police justified the preventive notice by stating that a criminal case was filed against Singh in 1988. However, the Court found that this case was related to an incident that happened inside the court premises and involved 40-50 lawyers at that time.
Since administrative judges have visited the district court many times over the years, the Court has now asked the Commissioner of Police to provide records of similar actions taken against Singh over the past 10 years.
Additionally, the Deputy Commissioner of Police and the concerned officer whose report led to this action have been ordered to be present in 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 as to 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 that who exactly ordered action against the petitioner.”
The action against Singh took place on November 15, 2024, when the administrative judge was on a two-day visit to Agra.
As per reports, four police officers arrived at Singh’s house to serve the notice and told him that the District and Sessions Judge of Agra had orally instructed them to keep him inside his house until the administrative judge left the district.
It was informed to the Court that Singh was kept inside his house from 6 AM to 4 PM, and even on the next day, police officials tried to restrict his movements.
ALSO READ: Delhi Police SHO Beaten Up in Karkardooma Court, FIR Filed Against Lawyer
The action seemed to be linked to a leaflet circulated by the bar association, which was meant to inform the administrative judge about the problems lawyers were facing in the district court.
“Very often, the administrative judge visiting the District Judgeship interact with lawyers so as to ascertain the smooth functioning of the District Judgeship. If there is any unauthorized interference by the State, under unknown instructions, for withholding information from the Administrative Judge during his visit to the District, it may cause serious impairment to the administration of justice in the Judgeship,”
-the High Court had noted earlier while seeking comments from the District Judge of Agra.
A sealed-cover report submitted by the district’s senior-most judicial officer stated that the police took action independently, based on some reliable information that lawyers might create an obstruction during the administrative judge’s visit.
“The report of the District Judge states that petitioner was not put to house arrest but the 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 any permission of the District Judge was taken. The comments of the District Judge also reveals that the Hon’ble Administrative Judge has also called for an explanation in the matter,”
-the High Court noted in its March 4 order.
The Court further observed that neither the affidavit of the Commissioner nor the District Judge’s report clarified who made the decision to issue the notice under Section 168 BNSS.
“The Commissioner of Police has stated that police personnel remained at the house of the petitioner only for 2-3 minutes to serve notice under Section 168 BNSS and that both copies of notice were retained by the petitioner. However, in the report of the District Judge it is clearly acknowledged that petitioner was kept under supervision,”
-the Court noted.
Given these inconsistencies, the Court has now asked for further explanation and summoned the police officers responsible for the action against Singh.
Advocate Sandeep Mishra represented the petitioner in this case.
CASE TITLE:
Mahatab Singh V State of UP and 3 Others.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI Sanjeev Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
