“Police Can't Detain Innocent Relatives to Pressure Accused to Surrender”: Allahabad HC Orders ₹40k Compensation from Cops' Salaries

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that police cannot use “pressure tactics” to compel an accused to surrender by unlawfully detaining an innocent family member who has no connection with the alleged offence.

The bench of Justice Atul Sreedharan and Divesh Chandra Samant said, "Such an act on the part of the police would constitute unlawful detention where such a person would be amenable to be compensated for the unjust loss of his liberty, however temporary it may be".

What was the case?

Court was dealing with a habeas corpus petition alleging that the petitioner/corpus, Arvind Kumar Yadav, had been unlawfully detained by police at George Town police station, Prayagraj.

An FIR had been registered at George Town police station under Sections 126(2), 191(2), 352, 115(2) and 75 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). During investigation, Section 109 BNS, relating to attempt to murder, was added.

The accused in that FIR was Suresh Kumar, the brother of the petitioner/corpus. He was subsequently granted anticipatory bail.

The petitioner's case was that police took him from his house in Jaunpur on June 23, 2026, brought him to George Town police station and released him only around 7 pm on June 26, 2026. A Supurdginama produced before the court recorded his release at that time.

Investigating Officer Ashvani Savita told the court that, on the directions of SHO Yogendra Kumar Singh, he and other police personnel went to the petitioner's house and picked him up on June 23 for interrogation in connection with the case.

The counsel for the State did not dispute that the petitioner remained at George Town police station until his release.

How was the unlawful detention established?

The high court had earlier directed the investigating officer to produce Yadav's Call Detail Record (CDR) to establish his location between June 23 and June 26.

The CDR showed that Yadav's mobile was at Badlapur in Jaunpur at 12:47 am on June 23. His location later shifted to Phoolpur in Prayagraj and, at 7:56 am, to George Town, where the police station was located. His phone was switched off at 12:11 pm on June 23 and remained switched off until 8:08 am on June 27, when it was switched on in Jaunpur.

The CCTV footage also corroborated his presence at the police station from June 23 to June 25. No CCTV footage for June 26 was produced before the court.

Court therefore held that Yadav had remained in the “unlawful custody” of George Town police personnel for at least four days.

Compensation for illegal detention

In view of these facts, court held that Yadav was entitled to compensation for his wrongful and unlawful detention and accordingly ordered the State to pay Yadav Rs 40,000.

Court directed that the amount be recovered from the salaries of the police personnel responsible for Yadav's illegal detention, in proportions to be decided by the State.

Court also directed that its displeasure with the conduct of SHO Yogendra Kumar Singh and investigating officer Ashvani Savita be recorded in their respective service records.

The petition was accordingly disposed of.

Case title: Arvind Kumar Yadav (Corpus) & Another v. State of U.P. & 4 Others

Order date: September 9, 2026

Bench: Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Divesh Chandra Samant