Police Cannot Humiliate Arrestees By Forcing Them To Strip Or Circulating Their Photos In Media As It Assaults Human Dignity: Rajasthan High Court Seeks Response From Rajasthan Police On Alleged Violations
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Rajasthan Single Bench of Justice Farjand Ali has issued interim directions after arrestees approached the Court alleging that police routinely make accused persons sit at the police station entrance for photographs that are later circulated through newspapers and social media. The Court also recorded allegations that, in some instances, arrestees are made to strip and remain in undergarments while confined in cells and are photographed in that condition. While seeking responses from the State and police authorities, the Court directed the Superintendent of Police concerned to ensure immediate deletion and removal of photographs and related content of arrested persons from online platforms where uploaded on their behalf. It also ordered the Police Commissioner concerned to remove a specific arrestee’s photographs within 24 hours and report compliance.
The petition further alleged that in certain instances, arrested persons were forced to partially disrobe and sit in undergarments while photographs were taken. Photographs annexed with the writ petition showed women seated at the entrance of a police station. It was contended that some of the women were unmarried and that public circulation of their photographs portrayed them as criminals without adjudication.
During the hearing, an advocate sought permission to intervene, drawing the Court’s attention to a contemporaneous news report concerning similar treatment of an arrested practising advocate. The petition invoked the right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and questioned the legality of such police practices in the absence of statutory authority.
The Court recorded that “the grievance raised before this Court discloses a deeply disturbing practice which, according to the petitioner, has now become alarmingly routine.” It noted the allegation that “whenever a person is arrested on accusation of commission of an offence, the police compel such arrestee(s) to sit at the entrance or in front of the gate of the police station, thereafter taking coloured photographs and circulating the same widely through newspapers and various social media platforms.”
With reference to the annexed material, the Court observed that “several women are seen sitting at the entrance of a police station” and that their photographs had been “circulated indiscriminately on social media platforms and in local newspapers, thereby portraying them as criminals before the public at large.”
The Court stated that “an accused is merely an accused and not a convict” and that “the constitutional presumption of innocence remains intact unless displaced by a finding of guilt recorded after a fair trial.” It further recorded that “any act which publicly parades an accused as a culprit, prior to such adjudication, strikes at the very root of constitutional morality and rule of law.”
On the scope of Article 21, the Court stated that “the right to dignity does not evaporate upon arrest” and that “even a person accused of an offence continues to be clothed with basic human rights.” The alleged acts of forcing arrestees to sit on the floor, disrobing them, and circulating photographs were described as “institutional humiliation and a direct assault on human dignity.”
The Court further recorded that “neither the Code of Criminal Procedure, nor the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, nor the Police Act or the Rules framed thereunder confer any authority upon the police to indulge in such conduct.” It noted that “the acts complained of are prima facie arbitrary, illegal, and reflective of unbridled caprice.”
Taking cognizance of the newspaper report placed by the intervening counsel, the Court observed that the alleged conduct was “plainly inhuman, degrading, and violative of the bare minimum human rights guaranteed to every individual.” It concluded that “the alleged act is not only inhumane in nature but also strikes at the very root of basic human rights and amounts to a clear infraction of the constitutional guarantees enshrined under the law.”
The Court directed that “the learned Additional Advocate General… is directed to accept notice on behalf of the respondents and file a response to the writ petition. The Superintendent of Police, Jaisalmer, shall file an affidavit specifically responding to and negating the aspersions levelled in the writ petition.”
“The Superintendent of Police, Jaisalmer, is directed to make all necessary arrangements to ensure immediate deletion and removal of photographs and related content of arrested persons from web portals, social media handles, and other platforms.”
“The Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur, is directed to immediately remove the photographs of Advocate Mohan Singh Ratnu from all web portals, social media platforms, and any other medium where the same are available,” and that “the compliance shall be ensured within 24 hours and shall be reported to this Court on the next date of hearing.”
“A detailed reply shall be filed to satisfy this Court that adequate, effective and institutional safeguards have been put in place so as to ensure that such incidents… are not repeated in future.”
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Mr. Sarwar Khan, Advocate; Mr. Rajak Khan, Advocate; Mr. Devkinandan Vyas, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Deepak Choudhary, Additional Advocate General; Mr. S.R. Choudhary, Public Prosecutor
Case Title: Islam Khan & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Case Number: S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 224/2026
Bench: Justice Farjand Ali
