The Allahabad High Court has ordered the Uttar Pradesh government to pay ₹1.25 lakh as compensation to a man who was illegally kept in police custody for five days before his formal arrest was recorded. The court said investigating officer “arrogated authority” and if guilty strict departmental action should be taken.
A division bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev passed the order on October 29, 2026 while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Gyanti Devi and two others for release of Chandan Rajbhar.
The court ordered compensation at the rate of ₹25,000 per day of unlawful detention and also clarified that compensation would not prevent Rajbhar from filing a civil suit against the Police Department for additional damages.
What Happened in the Chandan Rajbhar Case?
The case came up from an FIR registered on 18th July 2026 at Salempur Police Station in Deoria district under Section 87 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
The complainant (mother of the third petitioner) alleged that Chandan Rajbhar had eloped with her 18 year old daughter.
Rajbhar and the woman later got married at Durga temple in Siwan, Bihar and moved to Pune where they were living together as husband and wife.
The petitioners said police along with the woman’s father reached their house in Pune on the night of August 24 and 25 and took them into custody.
They were then brought to the concerned police station on the night between 27 and 28 August.
Rajbhar claimed that he was in police custody from August 28 till September 2 although his formal arrest took place on September 2.
Police Inquiry Confirmed Five Days of Illegal Detention
The High Court sought CCTV footage from Salempur Police Station between 6 pm on August 27 and 10 pm on September 2.
The State then placed before the court an inquiry report dated 21 October, 2026 prepared by Circle Officer Rajesh Chaturvedi.
The report said IO Deep Narayan Yadav had deliberately taken Rajbhar into custody on 28 August and then illegally detained him till September 2 when he was formally arrested.
It also stated that the investigating officer had acted negligently, in breach of duty and in gross dereliction of his responsibilities.
On the basis of inquiry report, Superintendent of Police Deoria Abhijeet R. Shankar initiated departmental proceedings against investigating officer on October 21.
The High Court appreciated the disclosure by the Circle Officer of facts and action taken by Superintendent of Police.
High Court Calls Police Officer's Conduct 'Arrogance of Authority'
The bench strongly criticised the investigating officer for holding Rajbhar in custody for five days without following procedure laid down by law.
The court observed:
“The way in which the I.O. has shown his arrogance of authority (by detaining petitioner No.2 for full five days without even thinking twice and without following procedure laid down by law) makes it appear that he thought it business as usual”.
The bench also said that if the investigating officer is found guilty in departmental inquiry then the harshest punishment for his deliberate action should be imposed.
The observations made were that police investigations should be conducted in accordance with the law and people shouldn’t be held beyond what is allowed by law.
Why Did the Court Award ₹1.25 Lakh Compensation?
The High Court put compensation at Rs 25,000 per day for the five days Rajbhar was held unlawfully in custody.
So the total amount was fixed at ₹1,25000.
The court also said the compensation would not limit Rajbhar’s right to bring a separate action in tort against the Police Department for damages.
It further said that the compensation could be recovered from the police personnel responsible for illegal detention after departmental inquiry. The State may take steps to recover the amount from those found guilty.
The court also ordered that Rajbhar should be released immediately if he was not required in any other case.
What happens to the Criminal Case Against Rajbhar?
The High Court said its observations and directions on illegal detention would not decide the merits of the criminal case against Rajbhar.
The allegations in the FIR will continue to be examined by the concerned trial court on evidence put before it.
The High Court’s decision was about legality of police detention and whether arrest procedure was followed or not. It did not say if allegations made in FIR were true or false.
Why the Allahabad High Court's Order Matters
The judgment emphasises the legal safeguards that are in place when police take a person into custody.
Under Article 22(2) of the Constitution, an arrested person shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours after arrest (not including time taken in travelling from place of arrest to court).
The case also reminds us of the need for accurate arrest records, police accountability and judicial review in unlawful detention cases.
By compensating the individual and allowing recovery from officers found to be responsible, the High Court addressed both the loss of liberty and accountability within the police department.
The departmental inquiry against the investigating officer is therefore an important next step in determining individual responsibility.
Comments