The Supreme Court, on February 28, strongly criticized the Chhattisgarh Police for invoking the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) against an accused immediately after he was granted interim protection from arrest in a separate case. The Court viewed this move as an attempt to circumvent its order and nullify the protection granted earlier.

A bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan expressed strong disapproval of the police action, warning of possible contempt proceedings against the officers involved.

"The officer is aware that this court has protected him from arrest, and then hurriedly the sections of UAPA are applied. We see the game in this. This is the grossest impropriety committed by him. We won't hesitate to initiate criminal contempt against him," remarked Justice Oka.

Read Also:- Supreme Court Verdict: Power of Attorney with Agreement to Sell Cannot Confer Ownership

The state’s counsel defended the police action, claiming that the accused had previously jumped bail in other cases and that the UAPA charges were added based on new evidence linking him to Naxalite activities. However, the Court was unconvinced by this reasoning and reprimanded the authorities for not seeking prior court approval.

"Was it not necessary for you to come before the court and seek leave of the court before taking action?" Justice Oka asked.

The controversy arose after the Supreme Court had granted interim protection to the accused on January 2, 2025, in connection with one FIR. Before this, an FIR (No. 39/2024) had already been filed at the same police station, and the accused had been released on bail in that case.

Police Misuse of UAPA to Circumvent Court Order

The Supreme Court noted in its order that after receiving notice of the accused’s interim protection, the Sub-Divisional Police Officer (SDPO) applied to the Sessions Judge on January 28, 2025, to add Section 13 of the UAPA to FIR No. 39/2024.

"The police officer was fully aware of the order passed by this court on January 2, 2025. The minimum which we expected was an application made to this court by the State seeking leave of this court to take action against the appellant in connection with FIR No. 39/2024," the Court observed.

Read Also:- Supreme Court: Partner's Contribution Becomes Firm’s Property Under Section 14 of the Partnership Act

The Court further criticized the police’s move, stating:

"Obviously, to defeat the interim order of this court dated January 2, 2025, action has been taken by the police against the appellant to ensure that he is taken into custody. The interim order dated January 2, 2025, of this court is completely nullified. We deprecate this conduct."

Bail Granted in FIR No. 39/2024

In its ruling, the Supreme Court reiterated its commitment to upholding justice and ensuring that legal provisions are not misused to undermine judicial authority. The Court noted that it had already indicated on February 17 that it would consider granting bail in FIR No. 39/2024 as well.

"Considering the fact that it is so apparent that the arrest of the appellant in connection with the side offence was only with the view to defeat the interim order of this court dated January 2, 2025, the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in the said case as well," the Court declared.

Case : MANISH RATHORE Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH | SLP(Crl) No. 17921/2024