Recently, the Allahabad High Court delivered sharp remarks on the functioning of the police and administrative machinery in Uttar Pradesh while hearing a matter under the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986. The Court expressed concern over what it described as deep political interference in governance, observing that police officers often appear more accountable to the ruling establishment than to constitutional principles. The case has once again drawn attention to broader issues relating to police independence, constitutional governance, and administrative accountability in Uttar Pradesh.
Justice Vinod Diwakar examined broader concerns relating to the exercise of police powers and the functioning of the Home Department. The Court noted that transfers, postings, and promotions have frequently been used as tools of political patronage rather than being guided by merit and institutional requirements. It also referred to recurring allegations of arbitrary arrests, selective enforcement of laws, misuse of preventive detention provisions, and suppression or registration of criminal cases for extraneous reasons.
The Court further pointed to the administrative culture that allows officers perceived as politically loyal to secure favourable assignments, while those displaying independence often face adverse postings. Referring to the Bikru incident involving gangster Vikas Dubey, the Court questioned the lack of meaningful accountability despite the serious lapses that resulted in the deaths of several police personnel.
The Court remarked, “The vertical loyalty of officers runs not toward the Constitution but toward the ruling dispensation.” Justice Diwakar observed that constitutional governance has, over time, been weakened by political influence and a culture of administrative patronage. The Court also criticised what it described as a growing tendency among sections of the police force to treat the rule of law as an inconvenience rather than a constitutional obligation. While noting concerns regarding misuse of powers under the Gangsters Act, the Court refrained from issuing a final ruling on those aspects since related issues are presently under consideration before the Supreme Court.
However, it censured the functioning of the Home Department, questioned the role played by certain senior officials, and directed the State Government to independently assess the suitability and effectiveness of officers serving in the department.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
