In a landmark decision, the Allahabad High Court has clearly stated that not all arrests should be viewed as acts of custodial torture. This clarification came as the court dismissed a writ petition by Shah Faisal of Mahrajganj district, who sought compensation for what he claimed was police misconduct during his custody.
Faisal’s allegations stemmed from an incident where he was detained for questioning related to a complaint that he assaulted a person named Rishikesh Bharti with a rod. Following his complaints about police treatment during the detention, an internal investigation was conducted which absolved the police officers involved of any wrongdoing. The judges, Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Prashant Kumar, noted that the actions taken by the police did not constitute an overreach in their duty to combat crime within society.
The petitioner had described a scenario in which he was coerced by a sub-inspector and a constable at the Partawal police outpost to pay ₹50,000, under the threat of being implicated in a fabricated case. When he refused, Faisal alleged that he was physically abused in the lock-up. Efforts to lodge a formal complaint about this treatment were purportedly stonewalled, prompting Faisal to turn to the judiciary by filing a writ petition.
In the petition, Faisal requested that the Superintendent of Police in Mahrajganj be directed to start disciplinary actions against the officers involved, initiate an FIR, and provide him with compensation for what he deemed wrongful confinement. However, the court found the evidence insufficient to substantiate the claims of custodial torture.
In its judgment dated October 15, the bench underscored the necessity of substantial evidence to support allegations of custodial torture, which it stated is a prerequisite for proceedings under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution—both of which are designed to address violations of the rights protected under Article 21, including the right to life and personal liberty.
