Cops Sitting & Twiddling Thumbs: Allahabad HC Slams Quality Of UP Police Investigations, Raps ACS (Home); Here's Why

The Court also came down heavily on the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) and Senior IAS Officer Sanjay Prasad for filing a "completely casual affidavit lacking seriousness".

Importantly, observing that Prasad's conduct prima facie suggests he "does not even care about the orders" of the Court, a bench of Justice Abdul Moin and Justice Pramod Kumar Srivastava directed the highest official of the State Home Department to show cause as to why action should not be initiated against him by the State Government as per the rules.

Contextually, it may be noted that this is the second time in recent days that the conduct of Prasad, understood to be close to the Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, has been criticised by the High Court.

Earlier, on June 2, a single judge had referred his conduct to the Dept of Personnel and Training (DoPT) for the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) to assess his suitability for future assignments.

Invoking the wisdom of Kautilya's Arthasastra, the bench had taken serious exception to his deliberate and calculated attempt to undermine the authority of the Court.

Case in brief

The division bench was hearing a criminal writ petition filed by a woman named Gayatri Devi, who sought a fair and proper police investigation into an FIR she had lodged on January 9, 2025, at a police station in Lucknow.

Initially, UP Police invoked offences carrying a sentence of up to 7 years against the accused, thereby securing protection against arrest.

The police subsequently added serious charges under the BNS [including Sections 338, 336(3), 61(2), and 340(2)] against them. However, the police failed to locate and arrest the key accused. Hence, the petitioner moved the HC.

In May last year, the IO had assured the Court that the petitioner's grievances would be redressed within 3 days; however, nothing was done, and the petitioner was made to run from pillar to post for justice for almost a year.

Expressing dismay over the inaction in the present matter, the bench, in its April 13, 2026, order, remarked thus:

"…it was in the fitness of things that the authorities should have shown some alacrity in the matter and should have taken the investigation to its logical end instead of sitting and twiddling their thumbs day in and day out which conduct of the authorities would be against their own assurance extended to the Court on 23.05.2025. This action on the part of the authorities cannot be appreciated by any Court of law".

Considering the aforesaid, the bench had directed the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Sanjay Prasad, to file his personal affidavit explaining why such a lackadaisical attitude was shown in the present case.

Although an affidavit was filed by the ACS (Home), Prasad, which the court took note of on April 29, the bench was thoroughly dissatisfied with it. It noted that the affidavit admittedly indicated a "lackadaisical attitude" and 'helplessness' on his part in tracing out the 4 remaining accused.

"…despite an assurance being extended to this Court on 23.05.2025, the matter stands as it stood on the said date with the exception of two arrests having been made and that too, strangely only after this Court has passed a detailed order on 13.04.2026, the arrests having been made on 17.04.2026 and 20.04.2026. This itself speaks volumes about the conduct and about the quality of the investigation on the part of the respondent-authorities!"

The bench, however, granted one more opportunity to the ACS (Home) Prasad to redress himself by filing a better personal affidavit.

However, perusing his subsequent affidavit on May 20, which again failed to specify details of the action taken against the other accused, the bench expressed its deep disappointment, saying:

"If this is the status of a personal affidavit, which is to be filed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) on the specific directions by the Writ Court and once this Court is already supervising the matter, consequently the fate and status of the other investigation/matters can well be understood, which is a thing which has already been pointed out by this Court in the order dated 29.04.2026."

The bench remarked that prima facie, the ACS (Home) does not even care about the orders issued by the Court and hence, it directed him to show cause as to why action should not be directed to be taken against him by the State Government as per the Rules.

The bench also took strict exception to a DCP being forced to leave his assigned public duties to appear before the High Court on the directions of a Special Secretary, Government of UP, who has no concern with the present case.

Since the issue remains unresolved, the bench has now directed the Chief Secretary, Government of UP, to file his personal affidavit indicating the incongruities pointed out by the Court in the case.

The matter is now listed for July 15, 2026.