Allahabad High Court summons cops for placing lawyer under house arrest citing HC judge’s visit

The Allahabad High Court on Tuesday summoned two police officers in Agra over house arrest of a 70-year-old lawyer during an administrative judge’s visit to the District and Sessions Court in Agra in November 2024 [Mahatab Singh V State of UP and 3 Others]..The Division Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Donadi Ramesh observed that visits of administrative judges to the concerned district are a routine affair and the same forming the basis for house arrest of a lawyer is unheard of.The Court took note of the fact that the lawyer Mahatab Singh was required to appear in 15 cases before the Sessions Division that day.“It would be a sad day if a lawyer practising in District Court is not allowed to attend the Court on account of restrictions put by the police authorities over the movements only because the administrative judge is to visit the Court. We are of the considered view that the issue needs to be probed further,” the Bench said..Accordingly, the Court called upon the Commissioner of Police of Agra to file a personal affidavit explaining the rationale and justification for service of notice Singh under Section 168 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and also maintaining supervision over him.“The Commissioner of Police will also clarify the policy to monitor and supervise movements of an advocate during visit of Administrative Judge and furnish details of such care and caution resorted to by the District Administration, during previous visits of the Administrative Judge, to the district,” it further said.The police had earlier justified the issuance of preventive notice stating that in 1988, a criminal case was registered against Singh. However, the Court found it pertained to an incident that happened within the court premises and more than 40-50 lawyers were implicated..The Court observed the administrative judge of the district must have made numerous visits during the last several decades and therefore, directed the Commissioner of Police to explain and produce reports regarding similar action taken against Singh during the last 10 years.It further ordered the Deputy Commissioner of Police and the concerned police official, whose report led to action against Singh, to remain present before the Court on March 18.“The concerned police official on whose report the action was taken against the petitioner shall also remain present before the Court along with records. The Deputy Commissioner of Police of the concerned zone, who was the highest authority allegedly kept informed of the matter, shall also remain present. This direction is required to ascertain as to whether such action of police is a part of routine exercise or is it a singular case of its own. We also want to know that who exactly ordered action against the petitioner.”.The action against Singh was taken on November 15, 2024 when the administrative judge was on a two-day visit to Agra.Four police officials are stated to have come to Singh’s house to serve notice upon him and told him that the District and Sessions Judge of Agra has orally directed them that till the administrative judge remains present in the district, he be detained in the house.The Court was told that Singh was detained in his house from 6 am to 4 pm and even a day later police attempted to restrict his movements. The action was taken as a leaflet had been circulated by the bar to apprise the administrative judge of difficulties faced by them in the district court.“Very often, the administrative judge visiting the District Judgeship interact with lawyers so as to ascertain the smooth functioning of the District Judgeship. If there is any unauthorized interference by the State, under unknown instructions, for withholding information from the Administrative Judge during his visit to the District, it may cause serious impairment to the administration of justice in the Judgeship,” the High Court had observed last month while seeking comments of District Judge, Agra..In a sealed-cover report, the district’s senior-most judicial officer claimed that the action was taken by the police at their own level on the basis of some reliable information that obstruction could be created by lawyers during the administrative judge’s visit.“The report of the District Judge states that petitioner was not put to house arrest but the police personnel have admitted that the petitioner was kept under supervision. It is also stated that even the District Judge was not aware of such action of police nor any permission of the District Judge was taken. The comments of the District Judge also reveals that the Hon’ble Administrative Judge has also called for an explanation in the matter,” the High Court recorded in the order dated March 4..It added that the affidavit of the Commissioner as also the report of District Judge of Agra do not specify as to who took the decision to issue notice to petitioner under Section 168 BNSS. “The Commissioner of Police has stated that police personnel remained at the house of the petitioner only for 2-3 minutes to serve notice under Section 168 BNSS and that both copies of notice were retained by the petitioner. However, in the report of the District Judge it is clearly acknowledged that petitioner was kept under supervision,” the Court noted.Accordingly, the Court called for further explanation in the matter and summoned the cops to know who exactly ordered the action against Singh. Advocate Sandeep Mishra represented the petitioner..[Read Order]