Article 21 Constitution Of India | Personal Liberty Of Detenue Cannot Be Curtailed Without Authority Of Law Post-Acquittal: Jharkhand High Court

"We are living in era of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, the inherent liberty conferred to the Human Being cannot be taken away without any authority of law." Jharkhand High Court, in a significant ruling, underscored the constitutional imperative protecting the liberty of individuals, even those held in detention centres, following reports that a woman remained incarcerated despite her acquittal in criminal proceedings.

A division bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Akhil Kumar expressed grave concern over allegations of custodial abuse and directed the presence of the Secretary, Home, Government of Jharkhand, to explain the legal basis for the continued detention. The court emphasized that the state cannot deprive a person of their fundamental right to liberty without due process.

The petitioner, a social worker, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the immediate release of one Rina Devi, who allegedly remained in custody at a detention centre in Hazaribag despite being acquitted in a criminal case. The petition further highlighted alarming allegations that the detenue had been subjected to continuous sexual abuse and custodial rape by a police constable, Ranjeet Mahto, over a two-year period between 2020 and 2022. The petitioner sought judicial intervention for her release, an independent investigation into the custodial violence, and compensation for the period of her alleged arbitrary detention.

The primary question before the court was whether the continued detention of an individual after their acquittal in criminal proceedings is legally sustainable under the constitutional framework. Additionally, the court sought to determine the state's accountability regarding the alleged custodial rape of the detenue by a law enforcement official and the failure of the authorities to provide secure conditions within the detention centre. The court was also called upon to ascertain the authority of law, if any, under which the respondent authorities maintained the custody of the detenue.

The court initiated immediate judicial oversight by directing the Member Secretary of JHALSA to facilitate an inquiry through the Secretary, DLSA, Hazaribagh. This inquiry involves recording the statement of the detenue to establish the veracity of the claims regarding her prolonged and potentially unlawful confinement. The bench treated the allegations with extreme sensitivity, noting that the fundamental right to liberty is non-negotiable under Article 21 of the Constitution.

State Accountability for Custodial Misconduct

The court summoned the Superintendent of Police, Hazaribagh, who assured the bench that a thorough investigation into the alleged misconduct of the constable would be initiated forthwith. The court further directed that proper security arrangements be established for the detenue to prevent any further harm while she remains under the state's care. The presence of the I.G., Prison, was also utilized to ensure administrative accountability regarding the conditions of inmates within the detention facility.

Court Mandates High-Level Administrative Presence

Recognizing the gravity of the allegations involving police officials and the infringement of personal liberty, the court required the physical presence of the Secretary, Home, Government of Jharkhand. The court held that the state must provide a clear legal justification for the continued detention, failing which the deprivation of liberty would be deemed arbitrary. The court noted that the inherent liberty conferred upon human beings cannot be taken away without the sanction of law.

"We are living in era of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, the inherent liberty conferred to the Human Being cannot be taken away without any authority of law."

The matter has been posted for further hearing on October 5, 2026, with the court requiring reports from the DLSA and the Superintendent of Police to be filed in a sealed cover. This order serves as a stern reminder to state authorities that acquittal marks the termination of punitive custody, and any detention thereafter must strictly adhere to the rule of law. The court’s intervention ensures that the claims of custodial abuse are subjected to a rigorous and transparent judicial inquiry.

Date of Decision: 01 October 2026