'Alarming' : Supreme Court On Allegations Of Fabrication Of Evidence By MP Police; Seeks Response From Senior Officers

The Supreme Court has taken serious note of allegations of police misconduct in Madhya Pradesh, impleading senior police officers after finding that a false affidavit had been filed before it and that further claims of fabricated evidence had been raised against the same officials.

The proceedings arise out of a case in which the Madhya Pradesh Police admitted to submitting an incorrect affidavit attributing eight criminal antecedents to a petitioner accused of storing fortified rice meant for public distribution. When the matter came before a Bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Sandeep Mehta on November 4, it emerged that in four of the cited cases, including one involving rape, the petitioner was not even an accused. The State sought to explain this as a “computer-generated” mix-up due to the petitioner and his father sharing the same name.

Disturbed by the submission of an erroneous affidavit, the Court had earlier summoned Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (Officer in Charge) Dishesh Aggarwal and Station House Officer Indramani Patel, directing them to appear on November 25 and file their explanations.

When the matter was taken up, Justice Amanullah noted the gravity of the misconduct. At this stage, Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde informed the Court that a 24-year-old lawyer, Asad Ali Warsi, had filed an intervention application alleging that the same police officials had fabricated evidence to falsely implicate him in a drunk-driving case after he refused to pay a bribe. The application alleged the use of “stock witnesses” across hundreds of FIRs and claimed that the intervenor had been assaulted, with the incident recorded on his phone. It further alleged that SHO Indramani Patel and another official were shown as witnesses despite not being present.

Taking note of these allegations, Justice Amanullah remarked that citizens now had to approach the Supreme Court to secure their basic rights. Describing the situation as “alarming”, the Court said the allegations of fabricated evidence and false implication directly affected public confidence in policing.

The Bench also observed that the ADCP appeared to be shielding the SHO. “Mr ADCP, it appears that your SHO is more powerful than you,” Justice Amanullah said in open court.

After considering the affidavits filed by ADCP Aggarwal and SHO Patel, the Court directed that both officers be impleaded as party respondents. It recorded:

"We have gone through the affidavit filed on behalf of Mr. Dishesh Aggarwal, A.D.C.P. (Officer in charge) and Mr. Indramani Patel, S.H.O. of the concerned police station in terms of our previous order dated 04.11.2025. As serious issues which relate to the basic and core issue of conduct of the police under the ostensible authority of the office/position held by them which has a direct bearing on the confidence of the public have been raised in the I.A. No.301315 of 2025, copy of which has already been served upon the respondent State, the Court would require the present two officers namely, Mr. Dishesh Aggarwal, A.D.C.P. (Officer in charge) and Mr. Indramani Patel, S.H.O., to also be impleaded as party respondents no.3 and 4."

The ADCP submitted that the allegations had been brought to his notice only recently and that he would forward them to his superiors, including the DCP and the Commissioner of Police, Indore. In view of this, the Court also impleaded the Commissioner of Police, Indore, as a respondent.

The newly added respondents have been directed to file their personal affidavits addressing both the larger issue of police conduct and the specific allegations made in the interventnion application.

The matter will be heard next on December 9.

Case Details:  ANWAR HUSSAIN v THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH|SLP(Crl) No. 14087/2025

Click Here To Read Order