Prayagraj, Mar 14 (IANS): The Allahabad High Court has stated that senior officials in Uttar Pradesh often do not comply with court orders within the stipulated time.

While censuring the Gautam Buddha Nagar Commissioner of Police, Laxmi Singh, in one such case, the Allahabad High Court said that this amounts to creating a hindrance in the administration of justice.

The Allahabad High Court made the observations while dealing with the anticipatory bail plea of a Constable named Ankit Baliyan. A case was registered against Constable Baliyan in September 2023 after the recording of a WhatsApp voice call allegedly revealed that he threatened to implicate a scrap dealer in a false case and demanded Rs 1 lakh as bribe from him.

He was also dismissed from service on the same day the call recording went viral, his counsel told the High Court.

While granting interim protection from arrest to Baliyan, the court in February, ordered Gautam Buddha Nagar Commissioner of Police, Laxmi Singh, to file a personal affidavit in the case.

Laxmi Singh was also asked to explain the compelling circumstances under which the official was dismissed on the same date.

The court further sought details on the number of corruption cases in which the accused police personnel were dismissed on the same day without any show cause notice or proper enquiry, over the last three years.

When the matter was taken up, senior officers of the Noida Police were present, but the Commissioner had not filed the affidavit as sought by the court on February 26.

Taking exception to the conduct of the Commissioner of Police, the court directed the Director General of Police to look into the matter.

“Since, despite being given reasonable time of two weeks, the Commissioner of Police, Gautam Buddha Nagar did not provide any assistance to this court with regard to correct factual position of the case, therefore, this court feels that the matter should be referred to the Director General of Police, UP, Lucknow for taking corrective measures,” it ordered.

On the merits of the case, the court found that the First Information Report (FIR) against Baliyan was registered without verifying the genuineness of the audio recording and tracing its original source.

The police told the court that the WhatsApp call was recorded by an “unknown passer-by” and thereafter one Shakir transferred it to his mobile phone. He then deleted the original recording, the police said.

The court thus observed that it was an admitted fact that neither the original source of the alleged WhatsApp voice call recording, nor the mobile number and the mobile phone by which the voice call was allegedly recorded, were available with the Investigating Officer.