The Allahabad High Court has raised serious concerns over the continued non-compliance of judicial directions aimed at improving the quality of criminal investigations in Uttar Pradesh. While deciding a habeas corpus petition filed by a mother seeking recovery of her missing minor daughter, the Court examined the manner in which the police investigation had been conducted and also reviewed the implementation of directions issued in an earlier judgment concerning police reforms.
Justice Vinod Diwakar passed the order on June 3, 2026, in Megha Raikwar v. State of U.P. and Others.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by Megha Raikwar, who alleged that her 15-year-old daughter had been taken away illegally by a named accused in June 2025. An FIR was registered at Sipri Bazar Police Station in Jhansi, and the accused was later arrested and chargesheeted. However, the minor girl could not be traced for several months.
During the hearing, the Court examined the investigation records and found prima facie deficiencies in the manner the probe had been conducted. The Court observed that the chargesheet appeared to have been filed mainly on the basis of statements recorded during the investigation and that serious questions arose regarding the fairness and effectiveness of the inquiry.
The Court went beyond the facts of the individual case and examined whether directions issued in the earlier decision of Subhash Chandra v. State of U.P. were being followed by investigating agencies across the State. Those directions were intended to improve investigation standards, strengthen scrutiny of chargesheets, and ensure accountability within the police system.
After reviewing chargesheets from multiple districts, the Court noted that the directions had not been uniformly implemented.
“The material placed on record indicates that, in a number of cases, the investigating agencies have failed to ensure compliance with the requirements mandated therein,” the Court observed.
The Home Department informed the Court that it had decided to challenge the Subhash Chandra judgment before the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition (SLP). It was argued that certain directions regarding pre-submission scrutiny of chargesheets by prosecution officers raised legal issues requiring consideration by the apex court.
However, the High Court noted that nearly a year had passed since the earlier judgment and that the decision to challenge it was disclosed only after questions regarding non-compliance were raised before the Court. The Court further recorded that no order from the Supreme Court concerning the proposed challenge had been produced before it.
Justice Diwakar expressed concern over the conduct of the Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Shri Sanjay Prasad, IAS.
The Court observed that the record prima facie suggested a lack of diligence in pursuing the proposed challenge while simultaneously relying on it as a reason for delaying compliance with the Court's directions.
According to the judgment, such conduct could undermine the effectiveness of judicial directions relating to accountability and police reforms. The Court also discussed the need for greater administrative accountability and suggested consideration of a doctrine of “superior responsibility” within public administration.
By the time the matter was decided, the missing minor girl had been recovered by the police and restored to her parents. In view of this development, the Court held that the primary grievance in the habeas corpus petition no longer survived.
The Court disposed of the petition and directed the Registrar (Compliance) to send a certified copy of the present judgment, along with the earlier Subhash Chandra decision, to the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Government of India, for record and such consideration as may be deemed appropriate in relation to the future assignments of the concerned officer.
The Court also recorded its appreciation for the efforts of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jhansi, and the police team involved in recovering the minor and reuniting her with her family.
Case Details
Case Title: Megha Raikwar v. State of U.P. and 4 Others
Case Number: Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 946 of 2025
Judge: Justice Vinod Diwakar
Decision Date: June 3, 2026
