UP Police Goes Hunting for Judge Instead of Theft Accused

In an episode that would be laughable if it weren’t so alarming, a sub-inspector in Uttar Pradesh’s Firozabad launched a manhunt not for a theft suspect, but for the judge presiding over the case—thanks to a staggering clerical error that could have had serious legal repercussions. The incident came to light last month when sub-inspector Banwarilal, tasked with executing a court proclamation against a man named Rajkumar in a theft case, instead wrote Chief Judicial Magistrate Nagma Khan’s name in the proclamation order and proceeded to serve the notice—on the judge herself.

In a report submitted to the court, Banwarilal dutifully stated that “the accused Nagma Khan” could not be found at the listed address despite a “thorough search,” blissfully unaware that he had replaced the name of the suspect with that of the presiding officer.

Judge Rebukes ‘Utter Neglect’

Unsurprisingly, Magistrate Khan did not take the mix-up lightly. In a sharply worded order dated March 24, she described the incident as “quite bizarre” and a glaring example of administrative negligence.

“Without giving an inch of attention to the process, he first carelessly mentions the proclamation as an NBW (non-bailable warrant), and then just wrote the name of the presiding officer quite blindly,” she observed. Slamming the sub-inspector for his “gross dereliction” of duty, the judge said Banwarilal appeared to have “little to no idea” about what was sent, who had issued it, or against whom it was directed. She noted that the officer had made “zero effort to pay heed” to the contents of the order, and criticised his apparent ignorance of even basic procedural norms.

Serious Consequences for Casual Mistakes

Magistrate Khan warned of the dangers such carelessness poses to the justice system and to individual liberties. “If such negligent police officials are made free to serve processes in such a blind form, escaping consequences of their wrongs, they will run amok, thus trampling upon the precious fundamental rights to liberty of anyone, per their whims and fancies,” she wrote.

Pointing to the heavy consequences these legal notices carry—including the potential deprivation of liberty—she emphasised the importance of “utmost care” in their execution.

Disciplinary Action Demanded

Calling the incident a “patent and grave error,” the judge has called upon senior police authorities, including the Director General of Police, to take disciplinary action against Banwarilal. The intent, she said, was not just punitive, but to ensure that “such unwarranted acts” are not repeated. The case has left legal observers and citizens alike both stunned and amused, but it also raises serious concerns about the quality of police training and awareness of due process at the ground level. In a system where a clerical oversight could have led to a judge being wrongly declared an absconder, the episode is not just a bureaucratic blooper—it’s a cautionary tale.

With inputs from agencies

Image Source: Multiple agencies