The Rajasthan High Court has taken suo moto cognizance of an incident involving the alleged manhandling and misbehaviour by a SHO of Police Station, Kudi Bhagtasani, Jodhpur, with a lawyer and his wife (also a lady lawyer of the Court).
Court Registers PIL Following News Report and Viral Video
The incident was brought to the attention of the Division Bench, comprising Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Mr. Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Baljinder Singh Sandhu, by Senior Advocate Dr. Sachin Acharya, an elected Member of the Bar Council of Rajasthan.
The mention was based on a news item in the daily newspaper ‘Dainik Bhaskar’ and a video of the incident which had gone viral, reflecting the SHO’s misbehavior. The Court immediately took cognizance of the matter, directing the Registry to register the case as a D.B. Civil Writ Petition (PIL) titled Rajasthan High Court Advocates’ Association & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr..
Details of the Incident at Kudi Bhagtasani Police Station
The incident, which took place at Police Station, Kudi Bhagtasani, Jodhpur, involved a lawyer, Mr. Bharat Singh Rathore, and his wife, a lady lawyer, who had accompanied a rape victim (prosecutrix) to the police station.
- Complaint: The lawyer complained that a person in civil clothes and without a uniform was recording the prosecutrix’s statement without following the prescribed procedure. The lawyer also demanded that the victim should not be called multiple times to the police station.
- Police Misconduct: Instead of addressing the complaint, the SHO allegedly misbehaved and manhandled the lawyer, shoving him and restraining him in a room.
- Wife’s Intervention: The lawyer’s wife insisted on the right to demand proper recording of the statement, requested that her husband not be manhandled, and demanded her own arrest if her husband was to be arrested. Police officials, including a lady constable, attempted to remove her, which she refused.
Commissioner of Police Assures Action
Pursuant to the Court’s direction, Mr. Om Prakash, Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur, along with Mr. Vinit Bansal, DCP (West), and Mr. Roshan Meena, ADCP, appeared before the Court at 11:30 AM.
The Commissioner conceded that the viral video “reflects that the concerned SHO has actually misbehaved”. He assured the Court of the following:
- Initiating an inquiry into the matter.
- Taking immediate action against the concerned officials, which would be reported to the Court by the same evening.
- Initiating departmental proceedings, if required, against the officials responsible.
- Providing soft skill training to the concerned SHO, as well as officials in the Jodhpur Commissionerate and other officials across the State.
Bridging the Divide: Advocates and Police as Two Limbs of Justice
The High Court emphasized the need for mutual respect and cooperation, viewing advocates and police personnel as “two limbs of the same justice delivery system”. The Court noted that the incident reflects a “lack of coordination”.
“While the police is required to work in difficult situations… the same cannot be expected from them when they are dealing with the lawyers. Similarly, lawyers are also expected to deal with the police personnel in a soft manner and with a polite attitude.”
Revival of District Coordination Committees
To prevent future incidents, the Court referenced its 2019 order in the case of Bharat Yadav v. State of Rajasthan. This earlier order had suggested the formation of a Coordination Committee at each district level to resolve issues that do not need to escalate to the High Court.
The Court’s previous suggestion for the Committee’s tentative constitution included:
- At least one representative from the respective Bar Association.
- One Member from the judiciary.
- One Official from the concerned police department.
- Chairmanship by the District Judge or a retired High Court Judge.
Finding that the Coordination Committee was “not been actively performing its work,” the Court directed the fresh formation of a Coordination Committee at each district.
The petition is now scheduled to be listed on December 8, 2025, for further hearing. A copy of the order will be sent to the Commissioner of Police and the Director General of Police.
Case No.: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23646/2025
Bench: Acting Chief Justice Mr. Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Baljinder Singh Sandhu
Counsel for the Petitioner: Dr. Sachin Acharya Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Sunil Purohit, Mr. Anand Purohit, Sr Adv assisted by Mr. Digvijay Singh Jasol, Mr. Sushil Bishnoi, Mr. Ratna Ram Tholiya, Mr. Shubham Modi, Mr. Manish Tak, Ms. Anita Gehlot, Ms. Deepika Soni, Mr. Rishi Soni, Mr. Rajesh Parihar, Mr. KL Bishnoi, Ms. Deepika Purohit, Mr. Deendayal Purohit, Mr. Rakesh Kalla
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi, AAG with Mr. Gaurav Bishnoi, Mr. Rajesh Panwar, Sr. Adv. & AAG, with Mr. Ayush Gehlot and Mr. Monal Chug, Mr. BL Bhati, AAG with Mr. Deepak Chandak, Dr. Praveen Khandelwal, AAG with Mr. Arpit Samaria, Mr. SS Rathore, AAG, Mr. IR Choudhary, AAG, Mr. Ravindra Jala, AAAG for, Mr. SS Ladrecha, AAG
