Join our WhatsApp Group
Breaking
Wednesday, October 7, 2026 Jaipur Edition
Rajasthan High Court
Criminal Law

Police Cannot Parade Arrested Persons or Post Their Photos Online; It Is Punishment Without Law: Rajasthan High Court

Published: · NyayVidhan

The Rajasthan High Court held that police who parade arrested persons, photograph them in degrading conditions or circulate their images on social media impose a punishment the law does not recognise (paras 13, 17-18). On a petition by Jaisalmer villagers whose post-arrest photographs were posted by the police, it declared police-orchestrated social-media condemnation a form of punishment without legal sanction and directed that 'Do's and Don'ts' be displayed at every police station (para 18).

Police Cannot Parade Arrested Persons or Post Their Photos Online; It Is Punishment Without Law: Rajasthan High Court
Photo: TrendSPLEND via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)

Judgment Intelligence

Petition Allowed
Islam Khan & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
2026:RJ-JD:17927
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 224/2026
Court
Rajasthan High Court
Date of Decision
5 May 2026
Bench
Justice Farjand Ali
Relevant Acts & Sections
Constitution of India — Articles 14, 19, 20(3), 21, 22, 226; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Sections 126, 170
Final Outcome

Petition disposed of with directions: strict adherence to the SOPs, with action for breach; no parading, disrobing or degrading treatment of persons without serious antecedents; no police social-media condemnation; and 'Do's and Don'ts' displayed at police stations and on official websites (paras 18-19).

Key holdings

  1. Police have no statutory or constitutional power to publicise or parade arrested persons (para 12).
  2. Social-media condemnation orchestrated by the police is a form of punishment with no sanction in law (para 18).
  3. The rights to dignity and reputation under Article 21 survive arrest and protect accused persons and prisoners alike (paras 15-16).
  4. A police-driven media trial undermines the presumption of innocence and the protection of Article 20(3) (paras 14, 16).
  5. Breach of the SOPs on treatment of arrested persons will invite action against the erring officers (para 18).

Brief Facts

The petitioners, villagers of Basanpeer Juni in Jaisalmer district, were arrested under Sections 126 and 170 of the BNSS after a protest during an Executive Magistrate's proceedings in July 2025 (para 2). They alleged that the police made them sit in undignified conditions, photographed and filmed them, and posted the images on official social media; several of them were women (paras 2, 6). By an interim order of 20.01.2026 the Court directed removal of the images, and of those of an advocate arrested in Jodhpur (para 6). The SP denied any humiliation but removed the content, and the ADGP (Crime) and the Jodhpur Commissioner issued circulars barring such publicity (paras 7-10).

Court's Findings

Neither the Constitution nor any statute authorises the police to publicise or parade arrested persons; doing so is a manifest abuse of authority (para 12). The police, as part of the executive, cannot usurp the judiciary's role by declaring guilt in public, and such conduct before trial inverts the rule that punishment follows conviction (para 13). The Court described "media trial by police" as a State-engineered narrative, relying on Rajendran Chingaravelu (para 14). Digital images leave permanent stigma even after acquittal; invoking the Ship of Theseus, the Court said a person so degraded "does not remain the same thereafter" (para 15). Articles 19, 20(3) and 21, the Law Commission's 200th Report, and Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi, Umesh Kumar, Mehmood Nayyar Azam, D.K. Basu and Sunil Batra protect the dignity and reputation of accused persons (para 16). Public condemnation is an extra-legal penalty outside the punishments the law prescribes, even in the gravest cases (para 17).

Legal Principle

The power to investigate does not include the power to declare guilt or to punish. Parading, disrobing or photographing an arrested person and circulating the images on social media, before any finding of guilt, is an extra-legal punishment that violates the presumption of innocence and the right to dignity under Article 21 (paras 17-18).

Precedents Relied Upon

  1. Rajendran Chingaravelu v. R.K. Mishra, Addl. Commissioner of IT & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 7914 of 2009, decided on 24.11.2009
    Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 14

    Deprecated the tendency of investigating officers to inform the media prematurely of alleged breakthroughs, which can jeopardise the investigation.

  2. State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi (1997) 8 SCC 386
    Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 16

    Trial by media is antithetical to the rule of law and can lead to a miscarriage of justice.

  3. Umesh Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2013) 10 SCC 591
    Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 16

    Reputation is an intrinsic part of the right to life under Article 21; free expression must be balanced against the reputation of others.

View all precedents (6)
  1. Mehmood Nayyar Azam v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. (2012) 8 SCC 1
    Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 16

    Humiliating an accused in custody, such as making him pose with self-incriminating placards and circulating the images, violates dignity under Article 21; constitutional courts may award compensation.

  2. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416
    Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 16

    An arrested person does not forfeit fundamental rights; mandatory guidelines govern arrest and detention.

  3. Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration & Ors. (1980) 3 SCC 488
    Relied Upon Discussed at ¶ 16

    Even prisoners are protected against cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 21.

NyayVidhan
Court Judgments · 2 min read
Decided: May 5, 2026 Justice Farjand Ali
PDF
WhatsApp Telegram X / Twitter LinkedIn

✕

Popular: POCSO, IBC, Electoral Bond, Article 370, NDPS Act, Bail Conditions, SC Contempt