PRAYAGRAJ — In a strongly worded judgment, the Allahabad High Court has come down heavily on the Uttar Pradesh Police over what it described as a pattern of encounter killings, selective law enforcement, and misuse of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act.
The observations were made while quashing criminal proceedings initiated under the Gangsters Act against three members of a family, including a woman whom the court said had been unlawfully arrested and detained, according to Live Law.
Justice Vinod Diwakar, who heard the matter, said the case raised serious concerns about accountability within state institutions and the manner in which stringent laws are being misused. The court noted that provisions meant to tackle organised crime are often invoked against individuals accused of relatively minor offences or those involved in civil disputes, while major criminal networks continue to operate.
A significant portion of the judgment focused on 35-year-old homemaker Lalita Tyagi. The court observed that no incriminating material against her was found in the charge sheets, yet she was arrested a day after the Gangsters Act case was registered and remained in custody for nearly 80 days.
Describing the arrest as arbitrary and legally unsustainable, the court questioned how such action could be justified in the absence of any evidence linking her to organised criminal activity.
Justice Diwakar also criticised what he termed a growing culture of “institutional impunity,” where officials act to satisfy political expectations rather than uphold constitutional principles. According to the court, arrests are often made without due process, preventive detention laws are invoked casually, and legal safeguards meant to protect citizens are routinely ignored.
The judgment observed that while authorities may formally comply with procedural requirements, the spirit of those protections is frequently undermined in practice.
The court also referred to the aftermath of the 2020 Bikru massacre involving gangster Vikas Dubey. It noted that despite questions raised by a Special Investigation Team over the conduct of a police officer in the case, departmental proceedings resulted only in a formal warning. Such outcomes, the court said, reinforce the perception of weak accountability within the police system.
Expressing concern over the functioning of the Home Department, the bench emphasised that constitutional authorities must remain accountable to the law rather than political interests. Governance, it stressed, should be guided by constitutional values and legal principles, not by loyalty to any ruling establishment.
On the facts of the case, the court held that even if allegations of cheating and forgery were accepted, they did not meet the legal threshold required to invoke the Gangsters Act. It found no evidence of an organised criminal gang, nor any indication of violence, intimidation, coercion, or systematic criminal activity.
Concluding that the statutory conditions for applying the law had not been satisfied, the court set aside the proceedings and cautioned then Ghaziabad Police Commissioner Ajay Kumar Mishra to exercise greater care while approving gang charts and authorising arrests under the Act.
The ruling comes amid growing judicial scrutiny of police practices in Uttar Pradesh. In recent months, another bench of the Allahabad High Court criticised the state’s “encounter culture,” warning that such actions cannot become a shortcut to rewards, promotions, or public approval.
According to official data released by the Uttar Pradesh government in May 2026, police have carried out over 17,043 encounters in the past nine years. The operations, the government says, resulted in the deaths of 289 alleged criminals, the arrest of over 34,000 individuals, and injuries to 11,834 accused persons. Police personnel were also among the casualties.
Civil rights groups and legal activists, however, have consistently argued that aggressive policing measures — including encounters, preventive detention laws, and bulldozer actions — disproportionately impact marginalised communities, particularly Muslims and Dalits.
The encounter killing of Asad, the main suspect in the murder of Ghaziabad teenager Surya Pratap Chauhan, has further intensified criticism. Rights groups have questioned whether such encounters — along with practices like “half-encounters” — bypass due process and weaken constitutional safeguards meant to ensure fair trials and accountability.
