In a bizarre turn of events in Uttar Pradesh, a police sub-inspector launched a search not for the accused in a theft case, but for the judge who had issued the legal order to apprehend him. The incident, which unfolded in a local court, has drawn strong condemnation from the judiciary for what it described as a “blatant dereliction of duty.”
The mix-up occurred when Sub-Inspector Banwarilal, tasked with executing a proclamation under Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), mistakenly listed Chief Judicial Magistrate Nagma Khan — the presiding officer — as the accused in the case, instead of the actual accused Rajkumar alias Pappu.
Instead of initiating a search for Rajkumar, Banwarilal filed a report claiming that the “accused” Nagma Khan was not found at her residence and even sought further orders against her. The error was discovered on March 23, when the court took up the matter and reviewed the file.
The Court did not mince words in criticizing the officer’s actions.
“It is quite bizarre that the serving officer of the concerned Police Station has little to no idea of what was sent by this court, who exactly sent it and against whom,” Magistrate Nagma Khan observed.
The Court also noted that the officer appeared confused between a proclamation under Section 82 CrPC and a non-bailable warrant (NBW), as he had incorrectly referred to the proclamation as an NBW in his report.
“He first carelessly mentions the proclamation as an NBW and then just wrote the name of the presiding officer quite blindly,” the order stated, highlighting that the officer had shown “zero effort to pay heed to the process of this court.”
Magistrate Khan said the actions of the sub-inspector raised serious concerns about the functioning of the police force.
“If such negligent police officials are made free to serve processes in such a blind form escaping consequences of their wrongs, they will run amok thus trampling upon the precious fundamental rights to liberty of anyone per their whims and fancies,” the Court remarked.
Emphasizing the seriousness of the lapse, the Court directed senior police authorities to initiate an enquiry into the matter and take appropriate action. A copy of the order has been sent to the Inspector General (IG), Agra Range, for further investigation.
“This court is of the firm opinion that necessary enquiry must be conducted concerning his working… so that such unwarranted acts are never repeated in future,” the Court concluded.
The episode has raised serious questions about the level of training and awareness among police officers when dealing with sensitive judicial processes that directly affect the rights and liberty of individuals.
Case: State vs Rajkumar and Anr – Available on LAWFYI.IO
