The Supreme Court of India has temporarily halted an order from the Allahabad High Court that mandated the Uttar Pradesh government to compensate a man with ₹10 lakh for being wrongfully detained by the state police for over three months. The decision to stay the order was made by a bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Sanjeev Sachdeva, following an appeal by the state government.
According to the Court’s interim order, “Issue notice. In the meanwhile, the impugned order in so far as it relates to imposition of cost of ₹10 lakh on the petitioner shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.” This stay is pending further legal examination of the case.
The High Court had previously determined that the man’s arrest was unlawful due to the police’s failure to provide written grounds for his detention as required by recent Supreme Court rulings. The counsel representing the Uttar Pradesh government acknowledged the lack of grounds provided at the time of arrest but contested the financial penalty imposed by the High Court. The counsel argued that while the procedural lapse was admitted, the financial penalty was excessive, especially as the responsible Station House Officer had already been suspended.
This legal battle originated from a habeas corpus petition filed by Manoj Kumar, who challenged his arrest in a criminal case registered in Unnao. Kumar’s arrest on January 27, 2026, was linked to an FIR filed in September 2024. He contended that his detention was unconstitutional, citing that the police had not provided the necessary written grounds for his arrest, as per the Supreme Court’s interpretations of Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution.
The Allahabad High Court, upon reviewing the arrest memo, noted that it only mentioned the crime number without specifying any grounds for the arrest. It relied on precedents set by the Supreme Court in cases such as Mihir Rajesh Shah v. State of Maharashtra and Dr Rajinder Rajan v. Union of India to conclude that the absence of communicated arrest grounds rendered the arrest and subsequent remand invalid.
More Read
The High Court had ordered the State’s Additional Chief Secretary (Home) to clarify why exemplary costs should not be levied against the State for Kumar’s illegal detention. However, the affidavit submitted by the Additional Chief Secretary failed to address the issue, merely stating that reports had been sought from relevant authorities.
Expressing dissatisfaction, the High Court criticized the Additional Chief Secretary for apparent negligence in addressing its earlier order. The court remarked on April 29, “If this is the non-application of mind at the end of the highest authority of the Home Department i.e. Additional Chief Secretary (Home), we can well understand as to how the other authorities of the State are working!!!”
Following these findings, the High Court declared Kumar’s arrest illegal, annulled the remand order, and instructed his release. Moreover, it imposed a ₹10 lakh cost on the State for failing to uphold constitutional safeguards. The State has now appealed this financial penalty to the Supreme Court, which has stayed the payment until further examination.
In this matter, the Uttar Pradesh government was represented by Additional Advocate General and Senior Advocate Sharan Dev Thakur, together with Standing Counsel Shaurya Sahay.
