The Allahabad High Court has cautioned police officials against mistreating government counsel performing court-related duties, observing that such conduct could amount to contempt of court.
Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal issued the warning in Sachin Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh, directing the Uttar Pradesh Director General of Police (DGP) to circulate instructions to police personnel across the state. The circular must make it clear that misbehaviour with State law officers tasked with communicating court orders will be viewed seriously and dealt with in accordance with the law.
The court’s intervention followed allegations that Rajesh Kumar Singh, the public relations officer (PRO) attached to a Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), had behaved improperly over the phone with Additional Government Advocate Anurag Pandey.
Pandey was reportedly attempting to inform the police official about orders passed by the court in a bail matter when the incident occurred.
Emphasising the responsibility carried by government counsel, Justice Deshwal observed that they act in furtherance of the court’s directions when communicating its orders to government officials. Any officer who mistreats them in that process, regardless of their position in the state administration, could face contempt proceedings.
Rather than issuing a formal reprimand alone, the court ordered that Singh remain in its custody until 5 pm on the day of the hearing, after which he was to be released.
Case traces back to alleged lapses in police compliance
The controversy emerged during the hearing of a bail application filed by a man accused of posting obscene videos of a victim on social media.
In September, the court had summoned the investigating officer after finding that the State’s counter-affidavit omitted several relevant details. When investigating officer Vinay Kumar Mishra failed to appear, the court directed the SSP of Azamgarh to execute a non-bailable warrant against him.
Mishra subsequently told the court that he had not been informed about the directions requiring his presence.
The court then ordered the SSP of Azamgarh and the station house officer of Maharajganj to appear personally. It also summoned the SSP’s PRO after being informed of the alleged altercation with the government counsel.
During the October 12 hearing, SSP Dr Anil Kumar informed the court that show-cause notices had been issued to the Maharajganj station house officer and Sub-Inspector Subhash Singh over alleged negligence in handling the matter.
A separate notice had also been issued to Singh, who was subsequently removed from his position as the SSP’s PRO.
The court acknowledged the SSP’s prompt action but made clear that protecting the authority of judicial orders requires cooperation from every level of the police administration.
By directing the DGP to issue a statewide circular, the court sought to reinforce a broader message: government officials must not obstruct or intimidate those responsible for communicating and facilitating compliance with judicial directions.