Allahabad HC Summons DGP in Person Over Police Failure to File Counter Affidavit in Murder Bail Matter
Justice Sameer Jain directed Uttar Pradesh's Director General of Police to appear personally on 24 August 2026 after the State repeatedly failed to file a court-ordered counter affidavit, calling the conduct “utter disrespect” of the Court.
The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, on 19 August 2026, directed the Director General of Police (DGP), State of Uttar Pradesh, to appear personally before it on 24 August 2026. The order came in a murder bail application filed by Pushpraj Singh @ Babloo, where the State had been required since 16 July 2026 to file a counter affidavit addressing a discrepancy between the alleged time of the incident and the timing of CCTV footage dated 21 June 2025. No counter affidavit was filed despite the passage of over a month. Justice Sameer Jain, sitting singly in Court No. 65, treated the default as a broader pattern of police indifference to court directions — one that was causing murder bail applications to remain pending for prolonged periods.
The Pending Bail and the Unfiled Counter Affidavit
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22293 of 2026 concerns Pushpraj Singh @ Babloo, who is an applicant in a matter arising from a murder case. The Court had, on 16 July 2026, specifically directed the State to file a detailed counter affidavit on a particular factual question: the alleged discrepancy between the time of the incident as claimed in the prosecution case and the time reflected in CCTV footage dated 21 June 2025.
That direction was not complied with. On 19 August 2026, Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned Additional Government Advocate-I appearing for the State, informed the Court that he had sent letters twice to the concerned police officers but that no one had come forward to assist in filing the counter affidavit.
The Court found this explanation unsatisfactory. The failure was not treated as an isolated lapse but as symptomatic of a wider problem. Justice Jain observed that the Court was “facing such problem very frequently” and that police officers appeared reluctant to comply with court orders. The direct consequence, the Court noted, was that bail applications in murder cases were remaining pending for a considerable period of time.
Why the Court Summoned the DGP
Rather than simply adjourning the matter or issuing a show-cause notice through the usual channel, Justice Jain directed the DGP himself to present in person before the Court on 24 August 2026. The DGP is required to explain why officers under his command have been reluctant to obey and comply with orders passed by the High Court.
The learned Advocate General of Uttar Pradesh was also directed to be present before the Court on the same date.
The direction to summon the DGP in person, alongside the Advocate General, signals that the Court views the issue as one requiring accountability at the top of the state police hierarchy rather than at the level of individual investigating or prosecuting officers.
The Court also directed the Office to provide a copy of the order to the Additional Government Advocate within 24 hours. Separately, the Registrar (Compliance) of the High Court was directed to communicate the order directly to the DGP, Uttar Pradesh, for compliance within 24 hours of the date of the order.
Systemic Concern About Court Order Compliance
Justice Jain's order makes plain that the grievance goes beyond this one bail application. The Court noted a pattern: police officers are reluctant to comply, and that reluctance is allowing bail matters — specifically in murder cases — to remain unresolved for extended durations.
The State's own Additional Government Advocate acknowledged the failure and attributed it to non-response from police, but the Court did not treat that attribution as sufficient mitigation. The burden of ensuring compliance with court orders was placed squarely at the institutional level of the DGP.
Order
The DGP, State of Uttar Pradesh, is directed to appear in person before the High Court on 24 August 2026 to explain the reluctance of his officers to comply with court orders. The Advocate General is also directed to appear on that date. The case is listed in the daily cause list at 2:00 P.M. on 24 August 2026. The Registrar (Compliance) is directed to communicate the order to the DGP within 24 hours, and the Office is directed to serve a copy on the Additional Government Advocate within 24 hours.