Page|1

Case Analysis of Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P

Submitted to
Ms. Anugya
Mishra

Divyansha Singh

BA LLB (Batch: 2021-2026)

Section ‘C’

Enrolment No. 10151103821

DELHI METROPOLITAN EDUCATION

Submitted in April 2023

Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P

INTRODUCTION

In this case, the Supreme Court extensively dealt with the power of arrests and its exercise. This case is also
known as ‘guidelines for arrest case’. The Supreme Court endeavored to create a balance between the rights
of an individual and the rights of collective individuals as a society in light of the increasing crime rate and
complaints of human rights violations due to indiscriminate arrests over the years.

Petitioner - The petitioner was a young man of 28 years of age who had completed his LL.B. and had
enrolled himself as an advocate.

Respondent 4 - Senior Superintendent of Police, Ghaziabad

FACTS OF THE CASE

The Joginder Kumar vs State of UP case involved the following facts:

The petitioner, Joginder Kumar, was a 28-year-old advocate who had been summoned by the Senior
Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Ghaziabad for inquiries in a case. On January 7, 1994, Joginder Kumar
appeared personally at the SSP’s office along with his brothers, Shri Mangeram Choudhary, Nahar Singh
Yadav, Harinder Singh Tewatia, and Amar Singh.

Instead of being released after the inquiries, Joginder Kumar was kept in custody by the SSP. When Joginder
Kumar’s brothers inquired about his release, they were misinformed and told that he would be freed in the
evening after further inquiries.

On January 8, 1994, Joginder Kumar was kept in jail for additional research in a case, and he was not
brought before a magistrate. On the third day, Joginder Kumar’s brothers discovered that he had been taken
to an undisclosed location.

A habeas corpus petition was filed to challenge Joginder Kumar’s detention.

These facts formed the basis of the case and raised important questions about the rights of individuals during
arrest and the limits of police power. The Supreme Court of India, in its decision, laid down guidelines for
arrest to ensure that arrests are made in accordance with the law and to protect the rights of individuals.
 Page|3

ISSUES OF THE PRESENT CASE

In the Joginder Kumar vs State of UP case, several key issues were raised. These issues revolved around the
rights of individuals during arrest and the limits of police power. The case highlighted the need for proper
procedures to be followed during arrests and the protection of individual rights. Here are the main issues in
the case:

Unlawful Detention: The primary issue in the case was the unlawful detention of Joginder Kumar by the
Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Ghaziabad. Joginder Kumar was called for inquiries in a case but
was kept in custody for five days without being presented before a magistrate.

Violation of Fundamental Rights: The case raised concerns about the violation of fundamental rights
guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. Joginder Kumar’s right to liberty and protection against arbitrary
arrest and detention were at stake.

Abuse of Police Power: The case highlighted the potential abuse of power by the police. Joginder Kumar’s
detention without proper justification and without being produced before a magistrate raised questions about
the exercise of police authority.

Lack of Transparency: The undisclosed location where Joginder Kumar was taken on the third day of his
detention raised concerns about transparency and accountability in the arrest process.

Need for Guidelines: The case emphasized the need for clear guidelines to regulate the power of arrest and
protect the rights of individuals. The Supreme Court of India, in its decision, laid down guidelines known as
the “Joginder Kumar guidelines” to ensure that arrests are made in accordance with the law and to prevent
the abuse of power by the police.

Importance of Habeas Corpus: The filing of a habeas corpus petition in this case highlighted the significance
of this legal remedy in safeguarding individual liberty and challenging unlawful detention.

The Joginder Kumar vs State of UP case brought attention to the issues surrounding arrests, police power,
and the protection of individual rights. It led to the formulation of guidelines that have had a lasting impact
on the criminal justice system in India. These guidelines serve as a reminder of the importance of upholding
the rights of individuals and ensuring that arrests are carried out in a fair and lawful manner.

CONTENTIONS

Contention of Appellant: –

The Petitioner Parties are directly points out the finger on illegal detention, Petitioner’s brother, who was
suspicious of Respondent 4’s motives, sent a telegram to the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, alleging that his
brother was involved in a criminal case and that the petitioner had been killed in a staged encounter, and
Petitioner Party want that Petitioner(Joginder Kumar) must be released from unlawful detention and
Criminal action must be Initiated against Ghaziabad’s Senior Superintendent of Police along with their
 Page|4

teammates.

Contention of Respondent: –

The Respondent Clearly ignores, Lies, and denies the detention of Petitioner by saying that the Petitioner
was helping us in some cases relating to Abduction and Petitioner was very cooperating as well, therefore
no question comes regarding detention of petitioner. The Respondent does not want this petition to be
considered as Writ Petition.

HOLDING

The holdings in the Joginder Kumar vs State of UP case are as follows:

 Unlawful detention is a violation of an individual’s fundamental rights: The Supreme Court of India
held that the unlawful detention of Joginder Kumar by the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of
Ghaziabad was a violation of his fundamental rights guaranteed under the Indian Constitution.

 Guidelines for arrest are necessary: The Court emphasized the need for clear guidelines to regulate the
power of arrest and protect the rights of individuals. The Court laid down guidelines known as the
“Joginder Kumar guidelines” to ensure that arrests are made in accordance with the law and to
prevent the abuse of power by the police.

 Arrests must be made in accordance with the law: The Court held that arrests must be made in
accordance with the law and that the police must have a valid reason for arresting an individual. The
police must also inform the individual of the grounds for arrest and the right to legal representation.

 Arrests must be made transparently: The Court emphasized the need for transparency in the arrest
process. The police must inform the individual’s family or friends of the arrest and the place of
detention. The police must also maintain a record of the arrest and inform the individual of the right to
inform someone of their arrest.

 Habeas corpus is an important legal remedy: The filing of a habeas corpus petition in this case
highlighted the significance of this legal remedy in safeguarding individual liberty and challenging
unlawful detention.

The holdings in the Joginder Kumar vs State of UP case emphasized the importance of upholding the
rights of individuals during arrest and detention. The Court laid down guidelines to ensure that arrests are
made in accordance with the law and to prevent the abuse of power by the police. The case serves as a
reminder of the need for transparency and accountability in the arrest process and the significance of legal
remedies such as habeas corpus in protecting individual liberty.
 Page|5

JUDGEMENT

The Judgement in the Joginder Kumar vs State of UP case was that the Supreme Court of India held that
the unlawful detention of Joginder Kumar by the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Ghaziabad was
a violation of his fundamental rights guaranteed under the Indian Constitution.

The Court emphasized the need for clear guidelines to regulate the power of arrest and protect the rights
of individuals. The Court laid down guidelines known as the “Joginder Kumar guidelines” to ensure that
arrests are made in accordance with the law and to prevent the abuse of power by the police.

The Court held that arrests must be made in accordance with the law and that the police must have a valid
reason for arresting an individual. The police must also inform the individual of the grounds for arrest and
the right to legal representation. The Court emphasized the need for transparency in the arrest process.

The police must inform the individual’s family or friends of the arrest and the place of detention. The
police must also maintain a record of the arrest and inform the individual of the right to inform someone
of their arrest. The Court also highlighted the significance of the legal remedy of habeas corpus in
safeguarding individual liberty and challenging unlawful detention. The filing of a habeas corpus petition
in this case served as a reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability in the arrest
process.

The Joginder Kumar vs State of UP case has had a lasting impact on the criminal justice system in India.
The guidelines laid down by the Court have been instrumental in ensuring that arrests are made in
accordance with the law and that the rights of individuals are protected. The case serves as a reminder of
the need for transparency and accountability in the arrest process and the significance of legal remedies
such as habeas corpus in protecting individual liberty.

GUIDELINES BY THE APEX COURT

These rights are inherent in Articles 21 and 22(1) of the Constitution and require to be recognised and
scrupulously protected. For effective enforcement of these fundamental rights, we issue the following
requirements:

1. An arrested person being held in custody is entitled, if he so requests, to have one friend, relative, or
other person who is known to him or likely to take an interest in his welfare told as far as is
practicable that he has been arrested and where he is being detained.

2. The police officer shall inform the arrested person when he is brought to the police station of this
right.

3. An entry shall be required to be made in the diary as to who was informed of the arrest. These
protections from power must be held to flow from Articles 21 and 22(1) and enforced strictly.
 Page|6

ANALYSIS OF THE CASE

The Joginder Kumar vs State of UP case involved the unlawful detention of Joginder Kumar by the Senior
Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Ghaziabad. The case raised several important issues regarding
individual rights during arrest and the limits of police power. The Supreme Court of India, in its
disposition, addressed these issues and laid down guidelines known as the “Joginder Kumar guidelines” to
ensure that arrests are made in accordance with the law and to protect the rights of individuals.

The Court held that the unlawful detention of Joginder Kumar was a violation of his fundamental rights
guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. The Court emphasized the need for clear guidelines to regulate
the power of arrest and prevent the abuse of power by the police. The guidelines laid down by the Court
are aimed at ensuring that arrests are made in accordance with the law and that the rights of individuals
are protected. Some of the key issues raised in the case include:

 Unlawful Detention: The case highlighted the issue of unlawful detention, where Joginder Kumar was
kept in custody by the SSP without being presented before a magistrate. This raised concerns about
the violation of an individual’s right to liberty and protection against arbitrary arrest and detention.

 Violation of Fundamental Rights: The case emphasized the importance of protecting an individual’s
fundamental rights, such as the right to liberty and protection against arbitrary arrest and detention.
The Court held that the unlawful detention of Joginder Kumar was a violation of these rights.

 Abuse of Police Power: The case raised concerns about the potential abuse of power by the police.
The unlawful detention of Joginder Kumar without proper justification and without being produced
before a magistrate highlighted the need for accountability and transparency in the exercise of police
authority.

 Need for Guidelines: The Court recognized the need for clear guidelines to regulate the power of
arrest and protect the rights of individuals. The Joginder Kumar guidelines were formulated to ensure
that arrests are made in accordance with the law and to prevent the abuse of power by the police.

 Importance of Habeas Corpus: The filing of a habeas corpus petition in this case highlighted the
significance of this legal remedy in safeguarding individual liberty and challenging unlawful
detention. It served as a reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability in the arrest
process.

The Joginder Kumar vs State of UP case established the unlawfulness of Joginder Kumar’s detention and
laid down guidelines to protect the rights of individuals during arrest. The case serves as a landmark
decision that has had a lasting impact on the criminal justice system in India. It emphasizes the
importance of upholding individual rights, ensuring transparency and accountability in the arrest process,
and providing legal remedies to challenge unlawful detention.
Page|7