VIJAYAWADA: The Andhra Pradesh High Court has strongly criticized the state police for rampant custodial violence and abuse of power, stating that summoning citizens to police stations, illegal detentions, and brutal beatings have become routine practices.
The court emphasized that police must enforce the law, not take it into their own hands, as this violates constitutional rights. The case centers on Golla Jayapal Yadav from Chippagiri village in Kurnool district, who filed a petition in 2016 alleging illegal detention and torture by officers at Kurnool Central Crime Station (CCS).
Yadav claims that in 2016-17, police subjected him to severe beatings, leaving him unable to walk even after eight years.
Justice Battu Devanand, hearing the petition, expressed shock at the evidence, including photos of Yadav’s injuries, and questioned, “Would anyone beat a person so badly that they can’t move for eight years? This is utterly barbaric.”
The court highlighted how Yadav’s complaint led to an FIR against CCS officers, but police dismissed it as ‘false’ without proper evidence or court approval.
HC adjourns case hearing to October 24
The police closed the case covertly, without informing Yadav or filing a final report in the relevant magistrate’s court, denying him the chance to contest the closure. Justice Devanand ruled this a blatant infringement of Yadav’s rights, noting that proper procedure requires a final report, court notice to the complainant, and an opportunity to object—steps police deliberately bypassed.
The High Court lambasted the growing trend of police “taking the law into their hands.” It cited a recent incident where a Mangalagiri CI assaulted a High Court driver, but police delayed FIR registration until court intervention. Even then, the CI wasn’t initially named as an accused, medical exams were skipped, and the probe was stalled until higher pressure from the DGP. “Is this how police should behave?” the court asked, underscoring systemic delays and cover-ups.
In the present hearing, Kurnool SP Vikrant Patil and CCS SHO appeared personally as ordered. Yadav’s senior counsel V. Raghunath presented evidence of ongoing disability. Government pleader Adusumalli Jayanti claimed notice was given for the final report, but the court retorted that merely notifying without providing the report copy renders the process meaningless, stripping the petitioner of fair recourse.
Directing the police to provide Yadav with a copy of the final report submitted in the lower court, the High Court adjourned the case to October 24 for further hearings, promising decisive action.
