Recently, the Allahabad High Court stepped in to examine a serious challenge concerning the misuse of preventive detention powers by the police in Prayagraj. The case revolved around the detention of a man who was allegedly kept in judicial custody for 8 days under proceedings meant to maintain public peace, raising concerns over whether statutory safeguards under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) had been blatantly ignored. As the Court scrutinised the manner in which the detention was ordered, it also uncovered broader concerns regarding the treatment of hundreds of similarly placed individuals in the Commissionerate.
The controversy began when the Petitioner was taken into custody on March 19, 2026, after the police claimed that he had created a situation likely to cause a breach of peace in his village. According to the State, he was produced before the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), Bara, and was sent to judicial custody because he could not furnish surety on the same day. However, the Petitioner challenged the legality of his detention, contending that he remained in jail until March 27 despite the preventive nature of the proceedings.
The Court examined the order passed by the ACP and found that the Petitioner had been directly remanded to custody until March 27 through a printed proforma order, without any indication that he had refused to furnish a personal bond or that immediate opportunities had been provided to secure his release. The matter gained greater significance when data placed before the Court revealed large numbers of individuals had been similarly detained in Prayagraj over the past few years.
The Division Bench of Justice Siddharth and Justice Vinai Kumar Dwivedi found that the statutory scheme had been disregarded in the Petitioner's case. The Court observed that there was “no recital in the order” showing that the Petitioner had refused to furnish a personal bond and held that the ACP had fixed the next date after eight days, resulting in detention “dehors the provisions of law.” The Bench remarked, “This is shocking state of affairs in the Commissionerate, Prayagraj. The Commissioner of Police has been given the powers of a Magistrate, which are being misused to the hilt.” The Court further held that the provisions of Sections 170, 126 and 135 of the BNSS had been “flagrantly violated” and concluded that the petitioner had been kept in illegal judicial custody for 8 days.
Consequently, the Court directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to pay compensation of ₹2 lakh to the Petitioner within 6 weeks at the rate of ₹25,000 per day and ordered that the amount be recovered from the ACP, Bara, after a disciplinary inquiry to be completed within three months.
Case Title: Mansoor Ahmad @ Lallu and Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
Case No.: Special Leave Petition(Civil) No.33915 of 2025
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddharth, Hon’ble Justice Vinai Kumar Dwivedi
Advocate for the Petitioner: Adv. Pushpendra Singh, Adv. Wahid Jamal
Advocate for the Respondent: G.A.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :