The Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has taken a strong stand against the conduct of a Station House Officer (SHO) who detained and handcuffed a man without any registered offence or court order. The Court held that such actions amount to a “gross violation of the fundamental right to life and personal liberty” under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The case arose from a habeas corpus petition filed by a person claiming that his brother-in-law, a man named Raja Dubey, was forcibly detained at Chandan Nagar police station. According to the petition, Dubey was held and handcuffed even in the absence of any FIR, remand or lawful order. The petitioner produced a photograph showing Dubey in handcuffs inside the police station.
When the matter was heard, the SHO — identified as Indramani Patel — admitted that Dubey had indeed been detained and that handcuffs had been used. The SHO argued that the detention and use of handcuffs were justified because the matter concerned the serious offence allegedly committed by Dubey’s father, and that Dubey was brought to the station for questioning; the handcuffs, he claimed, were applied to prevent Dubey from fleeing. However, the Court found no legal or factual basis for this justification. The SHO conceded that no court order authorising handcuffing had been obtained.
The bench, comprising Justices Vijay Kumar Shukla and Binod Kumar Dwivedi, rejected the justifications offered by the SHO. The Court emphasised that in absence of any statutory or judicial authorisation, detaining and handcuffing a citizen is manifestly unlawful and violates their constitutional rights. It condemned the officer’s conduct as arbitrary, excessive, and wholly unjustified.
As a result, the Court directed the Commissioner of Police, Indore, to file a detailed report indicating what departmental and criminal action is proposed against the SHO for his conduct. The Court thereby signalled its intention to hold police officers accountable when they act in violation of fundamental rights. The matter has been listed for further hearing.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.