PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad high court has pulled up the Uttar Pradesh Police over the unlawful detention of a man before his formal arrest, observing that the police appear to be acting as a “law unto themselves”.The court, in its order dated Oct 7, termed Noida ACP Kamlesh Kant and investigating officer Anuj Kumar as “highly ignorant of BNSS (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) procedures” and criticized their approach towards statutory requirements.The court asked the Uttar Pradesh director general of police (DGP) to prepare better police training modules to sensitise officers on civil liberties and the procedures that should be followed before arrest or detention.While making this observation, a division bench comprising Justice Atul Sreedharan and Justice Achal Sachdev allowed a habeas corpus petition filed by a man while holding his detention in police custody to be “unlawful”. The court directed his immediate release, if he was not required in any other case.“This case reflects the sordid state of affairs prevailing in the Uttar Pradesh Police. Repeatedly, cases have come before this court in which the strict requirements of law, both procedural and substantive, have not been adhered to in letter and spirit,” the court observed.“Documents appear to have been prepared and executed as a mere formality, replete with errors that raise serious doubts about the legality of the detention and arrest of the petitioner and others. It appears that the police are a law unto themselves,” the court added.It noted that the police had failed to comply with the procedural requirements of preventive detention under the law.On Aug 23, a clash broke out between two groups after which the Noida police took five men, including Deepak (petitioner in the case) in their custody at 7.34pm.Based on a written complaint, an FIR was lodged the same day at 9.39pm. Deepak was formally arrested at 2.57pm on Aug 24.However, the undisputed sequence was that Deepak was already in police custody before the FIR was lodged and was subsequently shown as formally arrested while in police custody.The court said there appeared to be a strong prima facie case that the relevant document was filled at a later stage and that the signature of the petitioner was obtained on a blank paper and countersigned by the investigating officer Anuj Kumar, leaving the portion blank to fill the grounds of arrest later.Though the state argued that the situation was tense and the police had acted in good faith to prevent escalation, the court remarked that it did not absolve the police of their obligation.“The situation does not absolve the police of errors committed by them in failing to proceed strictly in accordance with law. It is for the police to understand that all the provisions of the CrPC/BNSS providing protection to a person sought to be detained arise from the constitutional protection guaranteed under Article 22(1),” the court said.The court expressed concern that the police showed “insufficient regard for civil liberties”.“The narrative of the facts reflects that the police are acting in a manner that demonstrates their lack of concern for civil liberties of ordinary citizens and their propensity to make arrests without exploring the option of whether the case can proceed without such arrest or detention,” the court remarked, adding that the judicial magistrate had gravely erred by failing to scrutinise the police papers for compliance with the applicable legal requirements.Referring to instances of suspects allegedly being kept in police stations for more than 24 hours and subsequently released, the court warned: “Henceforth, such action on the part of the police shall not be tolerated on the ground of lack of knowledge of procedure and shall be deemed to be malicious unless the police provide material enabling the court to take a contrary view.”The court also directed that its observations expressing displeasure against ACP Kamlesh Kant and IO Anuj Kumar be recorded in their respective service books.