Invoking Kautilya, Allahabad High Court Flags Senior IAS Officer's Conduct To DoPT For Resisting HC Directives On Police Reforms

In an unprecedented order, the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday referred the conduct of Senior IAS Officer Sanjay Prasad to the Dept of Personnel and Training (DoPT) for the assessment of his suitability for future assignments by the Appointment Committee of the Cabinet (ACC). The stern order was passed by a bench of Justice Vinod Diwakar, who took exception to the deliberate and calculated attempt of Prasad, serving as Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Government of UP, to undermine the authority of the Court. To set the tone for the reprimand, the Court quoted Kautilya's Arthashastra regarding the conduct of government servants. Justice Diwakar noted that Kautilya prescribes that Superintendents of Government Departments must be examined daily while discharging their duties. "…for men are by nature fickle-minded and, like horses at work, exhibit constant changes in their temperament. Accordingly, the agencies and instruments of which they avail themselves, the place and time of the work in which they are engaged, as well as the precise form of the work, the expenditure incurred, and the results achieved, shall all be daily ascertained", the Court noted, referring to the Arthasastra (Second Book, Chapter IX) The Court observed that this ancient wisdom remains as relevant to the governance of public administration today as it was when first articulated almost 2300-2400 years ago. Briefly put, the Court was dealing with a habeas corpus petition by one Megha Raikwar seeking direction to the State authorities to recover her 15-year-old daughter (corpus) from the alleged illegal custody of respondent no.5. The Court was apprised that an FIR was lodged and subsequently, the police filed a charge-sheet based primarily on the statements of the accused. However, it was submitted that the charge-sheet was filed without arraying the 'real' accused. The bench found fault with the investigation, observing that it wasn't conducted in an effective, fair, impartial, and comprehensive manner, thereby raising serious concerns.Importantly, it also noted that the charge-sheet in the case had not been submitted in conformity with the directions issued by the High Court in Subhash Chandra & Others v. State of U.P. & Another, wherein exhaustive directions were issued to ensure that criminal investigations are fair, scientific, and legally sustainable. To assess statewide compliance, the bench had earlier directed the police to place on record ten charge-sheets, one each from ten different districts. Upon examination, it was found that in a number of cases, compliance with the Court's directives was not observed, which, the bench said, reflected a "lack of effective implementation of the aforesaid directions at the field level".It also noted that the Home Department had not taken steps to ensure that the 'checklist' it prepared was uniformly implemented. Hence, the bench sought an explanation from the ACS (Home) regarding this persistent non-compliance. In response, the Home Department filed an affidavit on February 20, 2026, stating that the State proposed to challenge HC's judgment in Subhash Chandra before the Supreme Court. Therefore, it was urged to the Court to refrain from passing any further orders concerning the implementation or enforcement of the directions issued in the said judgment until the Supreme Court decides on the “proposed Special Leave Petition (SLP)” of the state government. Though the Court deferred the matter and awaited information regarding the status of the proposed SLP, no information was provided to the Court till the time of dictation and signing of the order, despite a lapse of more than 3 months since February and more than 1 year since the judgment was passed. Taking strong exception to the same, the bench observed that the proposed SLP was relied upon by the ACS (Home) merely as a justification for postponing scrutiny of the continued non-compliance of the directions, rather than as a bona fide and diligent effort to obtain an authoritative determination from the Supreme Court at the earliest opportunity. "The facts on record, therefore, prima-facie indicates a lack of diligence on the part of incumbent ACS (Home)…such conduct has the effect of impeding effective consideration of the issue of compliance and cannot be viewed with approval by this Court…Such an approach, if sustained, has the potential to impede reforms intended to enhance transparency, professionalism, and accountability within the police machinery", the bench remarked. Taking note of this state of affairs, the Court made a scathing commentary on the bureaucracy, observing that 'unbridled' and 'unchecked' discretion attached to the civil services undermines the rule of law and legal certainty and also frees public officials from accountability. To combat this, the High Court recommended that the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training,...

Invoking Kautilya, Allahabad High Court Flags Senior IAS Officer's Conduct To DoPT For Resisting HC Directives On Police Reforms

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

Invoking Kautilya, Allahabad High Court Flags Senior IAS Officer's Conduct To DoPT For Resisting HC Directives On Police Reforms

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers