Telangana High Court Raps Home Dept Over Incomplete Affidavit on Police Cordon, Search Powers

Hyderabad:The Telangana High Court expressed displeasure with the state home department for filing an incomplete counter-affidavit in a writ petition questioning the authority of police officers to exercise powers akin to those of judicial magistrates, especially during the conduct of cordon and search. The Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice G.M. Mohiuddin observed that the power of warrant-issuing authorities must be backed by law.

The Bench was dealing with a 2023 petition filed by Vijay Gopal as a party-in-person, raising substantial questions on the legality of police officials, particularly those of assistant commissioner rank, issuing search warrants and conducting “cordon and search” operations. The petitioner alleged that police authorities are invoking Section 93 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and Section 47 of the Hyderabad City Police Act, 1348 Fasli, to treat themselves as first-class judicial magistrates. Earlier, the court had directed the home department to file the counter affidavit.

Following it, the state filed a brief counter affidavit stating that the searches were conducted in the interest of public safety and to trace offenders and other grounds. While hearing the matter, two days ago, the Bench took exception to the state’s counter-affidavit and described it is as “incomplete and sketchy”, noting that it was unaccompanied by any notifications or documentary material demonstrating how judicial or quasi-judicial powers had been lawfully conferred on the Police Commissioner or subordinate officers under the CrPC or the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The Bench observed that such perfunctory affidavits had become routine, leaving the Court without adequate factual foundation to adjudicate issues that directly impact personal liberty.

While acknowledging the efforts of the police in maintaining public order and safety, the Bench stressed that challenges relating to the conferment and exercise of warrant-issuing powers must be met with detailed pleadings and proper legal backing. The absence of supporting material, the Court noted, hampers its ability to decide constitutional questions involving individual rights.

The petitioner sought several reliefs, including a declaration that Section 47 of the Hyderabad City Police Act is unconstitutional for violating the doctrine of separation of powers and he also submitted that granting judicial functions to executive bodies goes against Article 50 of the Indian Constitution. He also sought directions regarding strict adherence to the CrPC framework and restrictions on inter-cadre deployment of IPS officers.

The Bench granted two more weeks' time to the Home department to file a comprehensive affidavit with all relevant documents, and the High Court adjourned the matter.