Allahabad High Court orders release of resident and reprimands Noida Police over unlawful detention

The Allahabad High Court has strongly reprimanded Noida Police over the unlawful detention and arrest of a local resident, observing during a hearing that the condition of the police in Uttar Pradesh is deplorable.

A division bench comprising Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev heard a habeas corpus petition filed by Deepak, a resident of Gautam Buddh Nagar, challenging his detention in connection with a case registered at the Phase-II police station.

According to police records, Deepak and four others were taken into custody following a clash between two groups on August 23 under sections 126, 135 and 170 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). An FIR was subsequently registered based on a written complaint by Shivram Sharma. The bench noted the undisputed sequence of events showed that the petitioner was already in police custody before the FIR was registered, and was later formally shown as arrested while remaining in custody. The petitioner submitted that his name was not mentioned in the FIR and no specific role was attributed to him.

The High Court raised questions regarding procedural irregularities, including the timeline of notices issued under Section 130 of the BNSS by the executive magistrate on August 24, a day after the petitioner was already detained. The bench observed that the arresting officer also failed to inform detainees of their right to consult a lawyer of their choice during interrogation, and pointed out discrepancies in bail bond documentation where arrest records lacked any mention of a specific sum or whether the petitioner was asked about his willingness to furnish bail.

Expressing severe dissatisfaction with the documentation and procedures, the bench orally told the Assistant Commissioner of Police and the Station House Officer that they should be ashamed, adding that police officials in the state appear to believe they can act arbitrarily without consequences.

The petition further alleged that despite a release order issued on August 24, Deepak was never physically freed and remained under continuous police control until being formally implicated in a subsequent criminal case. The petitioner argued that an illegal arrest cannot be automatically regularized merely by a subsequent remand order, pointing out date discrepancies where arrest memorandums dated August 24 bore signatures from August 23.

Finding the detention unlawful, the High Court accepted the habeas corpus petition and ordered the immediate release of the petitioner.