Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
News Updates

IPS Officer Missing- A High Ranking Officer Having Gone Missing A Serious Issue: Allahabad High Court Seeks UP Govt's Response

Sparsh Upadhyay
29 May 2021 7:13 AM GMT
IPS Officer Missing- A High Ranking Officer Having Gone Missing A Serious Issue: Allahabad High Court Seeks UP Govts Response
x

The Allahabad High Court on Thursday (May 27) asked the Uttar Pradesh Government to file its reply in a habeas corpus writ petition seeking production of Mani Lal Patidar, an IPS officer claiming that he has been missing since November 2020.The Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi was hearing the petition filed by Dr. Mukut Nath Verma, Advocate with a prayer...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

The Allahabad High Court on Thursday (May 27) asked the Uttar Pradesh Government to file its reply in a habeas corpus writ petition seeking production of Mani Lal Patidar, an IPS officer claiming that he has been missing since November 2020.

The Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi was hearing the petition filed by Dr. Mukut Nath Verma, Advocate with a prayer that a writ in the nature of habeas corpus be issued for the production of his client Mr. Mani Lal Patidar, IPS, Ex-Superintendent of Police, Mahoba, U.P.

He also urged to court to order a probe into this matter by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

The case before the Court

It was submitted that Mani Lal Patidar, a 2014 batch IPS Officer had been conducting operations against the mining mafia and in connection therewith his relations with certain sections in the administration got sour and thus, as a result, he was falsely implicated in a few cases.

It was further stated that on November 15, 2020, Patidar made a WhatsApp call to the petitioner (his Advocate) to inform him that he would be coming to meet him on November 27, 2020, in connection with pending legal matters, however, he did not come.

Thus, the petitioner alleged before the Court that high-ranking officials in the State Administration might have done something foul as a consequence whereof Mani Lal Patidar has gone missing and is not traceable.

Lastly, it was also stated that he was going to unravel some foul play in the administration therefore, it is possible, his life may be in danger. By expressing all these apprehensions, including that he might be in the unlawful custody of the respondents, a habeas corpus petition had been filed.

State's submission 

The Additional Advocate General submitted that Patidar was implicated in a few cases and he had filed anticipatory bail applications in this Court which were rejected, and that he had been in touch with various counsels who represented him in this Court to press his prayer for anticipatory bail.

It was further alleged that Patidar is trying to evade his arrest in cases in which he has been implicated, and thus, to malign the administration, instant habeas corpus petition had been filed with an oblique purpose.

Court's order

At the outset, the Court observed that as Patidar has gone missing and even counsel for the respondents does not dispute that Mani Lal Patidar is not traceable, the matter will have to be investigated to find out where Mani Lal Patidar is as also whether he is dead or alive.

Further, the Court remarked,

"Otherwise also, it is not in dispute that Mani Lal Patidar had been in the police force of the State of Uttar Pradesh and was a high ranking officer of the level of Superintendent of Police, Mahoba. Such a person having gone missing for last few months is a serious issue."

Therefore, the Court directed:

"It would be important to ascertain as to what steps were taken by the administration including the investigating agency to apprehend him, particularly, when, on the own showing of the respondents, his anticipatory bail applications were rejected."

The investigating agency dealing with the investigation of the cases already pending/instituted against Mani Lal Patidar has been directed to file an affidavit stating specifically:

  1. As to what efforts were made by them to arrest Mani Lal Patidar after tracing his whereabouts, particularly, when the anticipatory bail applications moved by Mani Lal Patidar were rejected;
  2. Whether any complaint or representation has been received at any level from the family members of Mani Lal Patidar of him having become untraceable, if so, what action was taken on such complaint;
  3. Whether the investigating agency have put on surveillance the mobile numbers known to have been used by Mani Lal Patidar to get in touch with his relatives, friends, counsels, if so, where his last location was found;
  4. Whether the statements of family members of Mani Lal Patidar have been recorded to ascertain his whereabouts, if so, the nature of those statements shall be disclosed; and
  5. Whether any coercive steps were taken, such as under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C., to secure the arrest/presence of Mani Lal Patidar, if so, the same shall be disclosed.

Case title - Dr. Mukut Nath Verma v. State Of Up And 11 Others

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order


Next Story
Share it