[REVISION HISTORY]

Allahabad High Court oversight of Uttar Pradesh authorities

Updated 2 times since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-09-01 09:16 UTC → 2026-09-02 10:18 UTC · added ~~removed~~

The Allahabad High Court has intensified its oversight of police conduct in Uttar Pradesh, addressing specific allegations of misconduct and systemic procedural failures. Regarding a May 2025 encounter in Shravasti district, the court’s Lucknow bench ordered a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe following a petition by Alauddin, who sustained gunshot wounds to both legs. The court expressed skepticism toward the official narrative, questioning how officers remained unscathed while suspects were shot in the legs. The bench noted such patterns might be driven by a desire for “social media praise, out-of-turn promotions, or to please senior officials,” emphasizing that the power to punish resides with the judiciary. The ~~court also flagged discrepancies in the First Information Report, such as the feasibility of 13 officers traveling in one vehicle and the accuracy of marksmanship under specific conditions. The~~ CBI must submit its report within three months. In a separate matter, the court ordered the Superintendent of Police in Unnao to investigate allegations of illegal detention and theft at the Hasanganj Police Station. A petitioner claims they were detained without prosecution in late July 2026 and that police personnel looted jewelry, cash, mobile phones, and cartridges. The court directed officials to preserve and examine CCTV footage from the station and mandated that appropriate action be taken if incriminating evidence is found. Additionally, the court has previously flagged systemic non-compliance with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) mandate for audio-video recording of search and seizure operations, noting the requirement is “practically not implemented.” Expanding its scrutiny of systemic issues, the court has now taken a stern stance against the quality of investigations and the frequent disregard of judicial orders. Justice Sameer Jain personally summoned Uttar Pradesh Director General of Police (DGP) Rajiv Krishna to address delays in submitting case diaries, counter-affidavits, and essential records. The court noted that such negligence causes serious cases, including murder investigations, to linger for months, directly impacting the personal liberty of citizens. Justice Jain dismissed the DGP’s presentation of improved conviction rates, stating that statistics do not reflect the “ground reality of the flawed and biased investigations” presented to the court.

Versions

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.