Allahabad High Court Orders Rs 50,000 Compensation For 5-Day Illegal Police Custody

The Allahabad High Court recently held that a man was kept in illegal police custody for five days and directed the Uttar Pradesh government to pay him Rs 50,000 as compensation, after finding that he was taken into custody on August 15, 2026 but shown as arrested only on August 19, 2026.

A bench of Justices Atul Sreedharan and Achal Sachdev passed the order on September 18 while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed by Kamlesh Kumar.

The case arose after a neighbour of the petitioner, with whom he had a property dispute, accused him of being a citizen of Bangladesh and approached the police with the allegation. An inquiry was subsequently conducted into his nationality, following which a criminal case was registered against him.

Court noted the petitioner was taken from his medical shop by Meja police on August 15 and was produced before a magistrate only on August 19, when he was sent to judicial remand.

Court confined its examination to the allegation of illegal detention and expressly said it was not commenting on the merits of the criminal case against the petitioner.

Police Took Man From Medical Shop On August 15

The matter arose from a property dispute between the petitioner and his neighbour, Geeta Vishwas. The neighbour had allegedly accused him of being a citizen of Bangladesh and lodged a police complaint.

An inquiry was subsequently conducted by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Meja. It led to the registration of a case under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, and the Passport Act.

The police inquiry report stated that the petitioner was allegedly a resident of Bangladesh and had a temporary address in West Bengal.

However, the Deputy Commissioner of Police's affidavit before the high court recorded that an examination of official records and CCTV footage showed that the petitioner had been taken from his medical shop in Sonar Tara by Meja police on August 15. He was sent to jail only on August 19.

The DCP also stated that the SHO of Meja police station and the investigating officer could not provide a satisfactory explanation for the petitioner's detention from August 15. The inquiry report termed their conduct gross negligence, following which both officers were suspended on September 17.

Five-Day Illegal Custody

The SHO gave a different explanation, telling the court that he had instructed two constables to ask the petitioner to report to the police station on August 15. According to him, the constables misunderstood the instruction and instead asked the petitioner to accompany them to the police station.

The SHO also said that on the same day he had to leave the police station after receiving information about a firing incident and proceeded to SRN Hospital, Prayagraj, about 60 km away. He remained there until the early hours of August 16.

The FIR against the petitioner was registered on August 16, after the inquiry report and instructions to lodge the case reached the police station.

The high court, however, noted that the police's own material showed that the petitioner had been in custody from August 15, although he was shown as arrested only on August 19.

“There is a clear cut admission on the part of the police with regard to the illegal detention of the petitioner for more than 24 hours,” court said.

It consequently held that the petitioner was in illegal custody from August 15 until his production before the magistrate on August 19.

Court Orders Rs 50,000 Compensation

Court directed that the petitioner be released forthwith, unless he was wanted in another case. It clarified that the order did not prevent the State from arresting him again if necessary, provided the procedure established by law was followed.

As a criminal case remained pending against him, the petitioner would also have to join the investigation whenever required after receiving notice, court said.

Court additionally directed the State to pay Rs 50,000 to the petitioner as compensation for the illegal detention. The amount is to be recovered from those found responsible after a departmental inquiry. Court directed that the compensation be paid forthwith and the recovery be completed within three months.

The bench also appreciated the DCP for candidly acknowledging the police error in his affidavit, saying his conduct should be placed on his service record. It similarly noted the SHO's acceptance of the error.

"...this Court wishes to record its appreciation for the candour with which Mr. Vivek Chandra Yadav, Deputy Commissioner of Police has disclosed unequivocally in his affidavit without trying to beat around the bush and accepting the error on the part of the police without any ambiguity. The courage of the said officer is appreciated," the bench said.

At the same time, court said that although there was no evidence of malice, the officers' lack of vigilance had resulted in the petitioner being incarcerated for five days without the protection of the procedure established by law.

Court described the episode as an “unfortunate chain of events” and hoped that corrective measures would be taken so that such incidents did not recur while ensuring that the police's investigative requirements and an accused's constitutional rights were both respected.

Case Title: Kamlesh Kumar (Corpus) and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Order Date: September 18, 2026

Bench: Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev