Kerala High Court Orders Mufti Police To Carry ID Cards, Authorization Order For Proper Identification

Post By 24law
February 15, 2025

Pranav B Prem

In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has mandated that police officers performing duties in mufti must carry their identity cards along with a specific authorization order permitting them to discharge their duties in plain clothes. The Court observed that failure to do so could lead to situations where citizens rightfully question the identity and authority of such officers.

Case Background

The case arose when the petitioner, Shibin Shiyad, was accused of obstructing public servants from discharging their duties. The police alleged that the petitioner and others wrongfully restrained and deterred police officers from performing their official functions, leading to the registration of a case under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The charges included offences under Sections 189(2), 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 132, 123, and 121(1) of the BNS. The prosecution claimed that two officers, Grade Sub Inspector Antony Michael and CPO Shebin Peter, were on mufti duty as part of an NDPS Special Drive. While following two individuals who appeared suspicious, they observed them conversing with three others. When they questioned them, the individuals allegedly sprayed liquid on the officers' faces and fled the scene.

The defense contended that the accused were unaware that the officers were indeed policemen since they were not in uniform and had not displayed their identity cards.

Court's Observations

Justice P.V. Kunhikrishnan noted that Kerala has a high literacy rate, and its citizens are well aware of instances where criminals impersonate law enforcement officers. He stated: “Nowadays, several criminal activities like defrauding people are done by criminals using uniforms of police, customs, CBI, etc. Even the name boards of Judges in vehicles are misused by the criminals to commit offences. Therefore, the police department should be aware that the general public is aware of these types of criminal activities by misusing the uniform of police, customs, CBI, etc. They may question the people coming in Mufti claiming that they are police officers.” The Court highlighted that the Kerala Police Manual (Section 294) specifies that police officers must be in uniform while on beat or patrol duty unless “for special and limited purposes mufti patrols are specifically ordered.” It further emphasized that neither the BNSS nor the Kerala Police Act explicitly authorizes mufti policing.

Precedents and Legal Standpoint

Referring to Avinash v. State of Kerala (2021), the Court reiterated the importance of police officers being identifiable in uniform: “The uniform of a policeman is his direct identification. A policeman in uniform is visible, and a citizen immediately knows that he is a policeman which will inform that the said individual is in charge of his protection and prevention of offences. It carries an undeniable symbolic value besides representing the State authority.”

No Proper Authorization for Mufti Duty

The prosecution produced an order from the District Police Chief, Kottayam (Order No. 567/GL/DCRB/2024/K dated 15.10.2024), claiming it authorized the officers to conduct the NDPS Special Drive in mufti. However, the Court noted that the order merely directed a special drive but did not explicitly authorize mufti policing. It held: “A perusal of the above would only show that a special drive is to be conducted from 18.10.2024 to 25.10.2024 in connection with the NDPS cases. In the above order, there is nothing to show that the District Police Chief, Kottayam specifically ordered to discharge the duty in Mufti policing.”

Mandatory Identification for Mufti Police

In light of the above findings, the Court ruled that if police officers are to operate in mufti, they must carry both their identity cards and a specific authorization order. It stated: “If in any special situation, Mufti policing is necessary, a specific order to that effect is to be passed. Moreover, the Mufti police people should carry their identity cards and a copy of the order authorising them to do the duty in mufti. They should introduce themselves as policemen and also show their identity cards before intercepting or questioning the suspected people. Without the same, if the public questions a mufti police, nobody can blame them.”

Bail Granted with Stringent Conditions

Given the facts of the case, the Court allowed the petitioner’s bail while imposing stringent conditions. It clarified that the investigation should continue as per law but reaffirmed the principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, citing Chidambaram P. v. Directorate of Enforcement (2019) and Siddharth v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2021).