Persons Under Illegal Detention Shall Be Paid Compensation By State: Allahabad High Court

Stressing that the award of compensation for harassment by public authorities not only compensates the individual, satisfies him personally but helps in curing social evil, the Allahabad High Court recently directed the State Government to strictly implement its policy of granting compensation to a citizen (25k), who has been illegally detained. 

The Bench of Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani and Justice Shamim Ahmed also appreciated the State Government for coming up with a policy decision to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- for illegal detention of any citizen by any Officer of the State Government and initiation of disciplinary proceedings against such officer.

The Court was dealing with the illegal detention of 2 persons who continued to be under detention despite submitting personal bond and other papers as directed under the pretext of verification, and thus they challenged their illegal detention before the Court.

The Court also observed:

"Public authorities acting in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions oppressively are accountable for their behaviour before authorities created under the statute like the commission or the courts entrusted with the responsibility of maintaining the rule of law."

Referring to the ruling of the Apex Court in the case of Lucknow Development Authority Vs. M.K. Gupta (1994) 1 SCC 243, the Allahabad High Court remarked:

"Once it is found by the competent authority that a complainant is entitled to compensation for the inaction of those who are entrusted under the Act to discharge their duties in accordance with law, then payment of the amount may be made to the complainant from the public fund immediately but it may be recovered from those who are found responsible for such unpardonable behaviour."

Importantly, the Court opined that an ordinary citizen or a common man is hardly equipped to match the might of the State or its instrumentalities and that if a public functionary acts maliciously or oppressively and the exercise of power results in harassment and agony then it is not an exercise of power but its abuse.

The Court also observed that the harassment of a common man by public authorities is socially abhorring and legally impermissible and it may harm him personally but the injury to society is far more grievous.

Significantly, the Court stressed:

"An ordinary citizen instead of complaining and fighting succumbs to the pressure of undesirable functioning in offices instead of standing against it...In a modern society, no authority can arrogate to itself the power to act in a manner that is arbitrary. It is unfortunate that matters which require immediate attention linger on and the man in the street is made to run from one end to another with no result.

The Court also opened that where it is found that exercise of discretion (by a public authority) was mala fide and the complainant is entitled to compensation for mental and physical harassment then the officer can no more claim to be under a protective cover and the test of the permissive form of grant gets over.

State's policy:

The State Government of Uttar Pradesh vide its order dated March 23, 2021 has come with a policy to deal with cases of Section 107, 116, 116(3) and 151 CrPC, and the policy provides that:

• In case of an illegal detention of a person in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, disciplinary action would be taken against the erring official (if found guilty) as per the rules.
  
• The report of disciplinary action would have to be submitted within 3 months, or any such period prescribed under the applicable rules.
• Where the detention of a citizen is in fact found to be illegal, the person shall be paid Rs. 25k as compensation.

The Court directed the State Government to:

• Where the detention of a citizen is in fact found to be illegal, the person shall be paid Rs. 25k as compensation.
• The State Government shall publish Para 12 of its Policy decision dated 23.03.2021 in all largely circulated National Level newspaper having circulation in the State of Uttar Pradesh and shall also display it on display board at prominent places within public view, in all blocks, Tehsil Headquarters, Police Stations and in campus of District Collectorate in the whole of the State of Uttar Pradesh.
• Copy of the order shall be sent by the State Government to all District level and Tehsil level Bar Associations in the whole of the State of Uttar Pradesh.

Case title - Shiv Kumar Verma and Another v. State Of U.P. and 3 Others 

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order