[Missing IPS Officer] High-ranking officer missing, a serious issue: Allahabad High Court seeks State's response

The Allahabad High Court on Thursday expressed concern over an officer of the Indian Police Service (IPS) in Uttar Pradesh, Mani Lal Patidar having gone missing for months (Dr. Mukut Nath Verma v. State of UP)..Given that Patidar was a high ranking officer, the fact that he has gone missing is a serious issue, the Court said, while directing the State to file a response on the measures taken to track him. .A Division Bench of Justices Manoj Mishra and Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi, observed that the probe is required to find out where Mani Lal Patidar is and also as to whether he is dead or alive.."... as the case of the petitioner is that Mani Lal Patidar has gone missing and even counsel for the respondents does not dispute that Mani Lal Patidar is not traceable, the matter will have to be investigated to find out where Mani Lal Patidar is as also whether he is dead or alive. Otherwise also, it is not in dispute that Mani Lal Patidar had been in the police force of the State of Uttar Pradesh and was a high-ranking officer of the level of Superintendent of Police, Mahoba. Such a person having gone missing for last few months is a serious issue", the Court's order stated..Case background.The Court was dealing with a habeas corpus petition filed by Advocate, Dr. Mukut Nath Verma seeking the production of his client, Mani Lal Patidar, an IPS officer and the Ex-Superintendent of Police, Mahoba, Uttar Pradesh. .The Court was told that Patidar had been conducting operations against mining mafia. His relations with certain section in the administration got sour as a result and he was falsely implicated in a few cases, it was submitted..On November 15, 2020, Patidar is stated to have made a WhatsApp call to the Advocate Verma to arrange a meeting with the lawyer on November 27 in connection with pending legal matters. However, the IPS officer did not turn up for this meeting, the Court was told. .Suspecting that his life may be in danger, the lawyer moved the High Court. In his petition, it was also submitted that the IPS officer was going to unravel some foul play in the administration. .On the other hand Additional Advocate General Manish Goyal countered that the anticipatory bail applications moved by the IPS officer in certain cases against him had been rejected earlier. .As such, the AAG argued that Patidar was trying to evade his arrest and that the habeas corpus plea was filed with an oblique purpose and only intended to malign the administration..The Court, however, opined that a probe is required to trace the whereabouts of the missing IPS officer. ."... it would be important to ascertain as to what steps were taken by the administration including the investigating agency to apprehend him, particularly, when, on the own showing of the respondents, his anticipatory bail applications were rejected", the Court said..Court's directions.The Court went on to direct the State to file an affidavit with the following details by the next hearing:.(a) What efforts were made to arrest Mani Lal Patidar after tracing his whereabouts, particularly, when the anticipatory bail applications moved by Mani Lal Patidar were rejected?(b) Whether any complaint or representation has been received at any level from the family members of Mani Lal Patidar of him having become untraceable, if so, what action was taken on such complaint?(c) Whether the investigating agency have put on surveillance the mobile numbers known to have been used by Mani Lal Patidar to get in touch with his relatives, friends, counsel? If so, where his last location was found?(d) Whether the statements of family members of Mani Lal Patidar have been recorded to ascertain his whereabouts. If so, the nature of those statements shall be disclosed.(e) Whether any coercive steps were taken, such as under Section 82 (proclamation for person absconding) or 83 (attachment of [roperty of person absconding) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to secure the arrest or the presence of Mani Lal Patidar. If so, the same shall be disclosed..This affidavit is to be filed by the investigating agency dealing with the investigation of the cases already instituted against Mani Lal Patidar..The matter will be heard next on June 14..[Read order]