Police Selective Arrest Policy Must Be Deprecated
While upholding the age-old maxim that "Be you ever so high, the law stands above you," we see that none other than the Delhi High Court in a most learned, laudable, landmark, logical and latest oral judgement titled Rajkumar vs State (NCT of Delhi) in CNR No. DLHC010273822026 and cited in Neutral Citation No.: 2026:DHC:7282 that was pronounced just recently on 31.08.2026 has minced absolutely just no words to make it indubitably clear that the police cannot selectively arrest some of the accused persons and the policy of picking and choosing persons to be taken into custody must be deprecated. It must be noted that the Single Judge Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr Justice Girish Kathpalia was most unequivocal in holding that the police must clearly state whether they want to arrest a person or not. We need to note that the Delhi High Court made the key observation while rejecting a bail application of one Rajkumar, who is an accused in a child trafficking case.
Also Read: Can America Reform the Supreme Court? Latest 5–4 Ruling Reignites Term Limits Debate
Case Background And Bail Application
At the very outset, this elegant, exemplary, explicit, erudite and effective oral judgement authored by the Single Judge Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr Justice Girish Kathpalia of Delhi High Court sets the ball in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that "the accused/applicants seek regular bail in case of FIR No. 293/2024 of Police Station Nangloi for offence under Section 370/34 IPC and 81 JJ Act.”
As we see, the Bench then points out in para 2 of this robust judgement that "a status report was not filed." However, at request of both sides, I have heard the arguments.”
Prosecution Allegations Of Child Trafficking
To put things in perspective, the Bench envisages in para 3 of this brilliant judgement that “Broadly speaking, the prosecution allegation is that the accused/applicant is involved in child trafficking." According to the prosecution, the accused/applicant and co-accused Gayatri impersonated husband and wife, and they took an infant girl in adoption. Thereafter, they sold away the said girl infant to co-accused Deepika, who sold away the child further.”
Arguments Raised For The Accused
As things stand, on the one hand, the Bench observes in para 4 of this notable judgement that "learned counsel for the accused/applicant submits that he has been in custody for the past two and a half years and all public witnesses stand examined in trial. " Learned counsel for the accused/applicant vehemently denies any incriminating role as alleged by the prosecution. It is contended by learned counsel that the accused/applicant has been falsely implicated simply because he happens to be the paternal uncle of the co-accused, Deepika, who has been granted bail. It is also submitted by learned counsel that the main accused, Dr Kulvinder Kaur, has not been arrested by the police to date, so the accused/applicant deserves the relief sought.”
State’s Opposition To Bail
On the other hand, the Bench then mentions in para 5 of this bold judgement that "the learned APP for State, assisted by Investigating Officer/Inspector Puneet Bhati and SI Ashok Kumar, strongly opposes the bail application in view of the nature of the offence. " Further, it is submitted by the learned APP for the State on the instructions of the Investigating Officer that the accused/applicant is clearly visible in photographs while taking custody of the adopted infant. As regards co-accused Dr Kulvinder Kaur, I have asked the Investigating Officer/SI Ashok Kumar to explain her status, but in this regard, the submission of learned counsel for the accused/applicant appears to be correct that police are taking practically no action against Dr Kulvinder Kaur.”
Delhi High Court On Selective Arrests
Most significantly, most remarkably and so also most commendably, we observe that the Bench then encapsulates in para 6 what constitutes the cornerstone of this most refreshing judgement, postulating precisely that, “Of course, the policy of the State to selectively arrest some of the accused persons cannot be approved. The police should clearly state whether they want to arrest an accused or not. The Court cannot direct the police to do or not to do so. Such a kind of pick and choose in matters of arrest must be deprecated. A copy of this order will be sent to the concerned DCP to look into the matter.” Absolutely right. No denying or disputing it!
Key Principles on Police Arrest
- The policy of the State to selectively arrest some of the accused persons cannot be approved.
- The police should clearly state whether they want to arrest an accused or not.
- The Court cannot direct the police to do or not to do so.
- Such a kind of pick and choose in matters of arrest must be deprecated.
Be it noted, the Bench notes in para 7 that, “At this stage, the learned APP for State submits that they shall ensure that Dr Kulvinder Kaur is arrested. It seems that now the State realises the gravity of the alleged offence.”
Court Cannot Ignore The Gravity Of The Offence
Most rationally, the Bench opines in para 8, holding that, “I am of the considered view that merely because for some unknown reason, the police opted not to arrest one of the accused persons, the Court cannot shut its eyes to the gravity of the alleged offence.”
Impact Of Child Trafficking On The Infant
It cannot be just glossed over that the Bench then lays bare in para 9 of this progressive judgement, pointing out that "one has to understand that every time custody of an infant is taken away from her biological mother, followed by the adoptive parent, followed further by other persons as happened in the present case, the infant suffers tremendous dent in her psyche, which gets manifested in her personality at some future stage. " That too, in the case of the present kind, provided the trafficked infant is not exploited for multiple reasons by the end purchaser.”
It is worth noting that the Bench notes in para 10 of this pertinent judgement that "it is also part of the prosecution case that the said girl infant was the sixth girl child in the family of her biological parents." As mentioned above, the accused/applicant is visible in the photographs while accepting the girl infant in the presence of the biological parents of the infant. Admittedly, the accused/applicant now does not have custody of that infant, who was adopted by him. The prima facie impression is that as alleged by prosecution, the girl infant was sold away.”
Directions To Rescue The Trafficked Child
Most forthrightly, the Bench points out in para 11 of this pragmatic judgement mandating, directing and holding that, “In this regard, the role played by the investigators in this case is highly appalling. To date, the allegedly trafficked girl child has not been recovered/rescued by police. On this aspect also, a copy of this order will be sent to the concerned DCP to make sure that the said girl child is rescued at the earliest. In this regard, a status report shall be filed by the concerned DCP within four weeks.”
Bail Parity With Co-Accused
It would be instructive to note that the Bench then hastens to add in para 12 of this balanced judgement, noting that "learned counsel for the accused/applicant also seeks parity with co-accused Deepika. But as correctly pointed out by the learned APP for State, Deepika was granted bail for reasons completely distinct from the present case, and also admittedly, Deepika is not visible in the photographs while accepting the infant girl.”
Selective Arrest Remains Unexplained
It would be worthwhile to note that the Bench then deems it fit to note in para 13 of this remarkable judgement that, “At this stage, the learned APP for State submits that Kulvinder Kaur is not even a doctor but an unqualified nurse. The fact remains that there is no explanation for the selective arrest of the accused persons involved in the present case.”
Bail Application Dismissed
Resultantly, the Bench then also deems it fit to direct and hold in para 14 of this rational judgement that, “Considering the overall circumstances as described above, I do not find it a fit case to release the accused/applicant on bail. The bail application is dismissed.”
Finally, we see that the Bench then concludes by directing and holding in para 15 of this noteworthy judgement that "a copy of this order be sent to the concerned jail superintendent for being conveyed to the accused/applicant immediately.”
Also Read: Can a U.S. President Be Prosecuted While in Office? Presidential Immunity Explained
Conclusion: Police Must Avoid Pick-and-Chose Arrests
In conclusion, it is high time that the police pay heed to what is held so very explicitly by the Delhi High Court in this leading case and shun the most reprehensible trend to pick and choose which accused to arrest. This “pick and choose” selective policy of police has been the main root cause of tarnishing the reputation of the police and denting its credibility in the eyes of the people, which definitely cannot any longer be brushed beneath the carpet! It has to be not only just strongly condemned, but the strictest action must be taken against the erring police officials!
Need For Impartial And Transparent Policing
It also certainly merits just no reiteration, and so also is a no-brainer that the police have to be beyond a straw of doubt, completely impartial and transparent in their style of functioning, as this alone can prove to be the single biggest factor to enhance their credibility in the eyes of the people, which is undoubtedly now the crying need of the hour also! In addition, the police need to be more swift in their functioning, as has been highlighted and lamented by the Delhi High Court in this notable judgement. We saw in this recent judgement that the Delhi police were at a complete loss to explain why Kulvinder Kaur was not arrested.
Investigation Lapses in Child Trafficking Case
Most alarmingly, the Delhi High Court very rightly lamented that the role played by the “investigators in this case is highly appalling” since they have inexplicably failed to recover the trafficked child even two years after the FIR was registered, which is definitely a very serious matter. This is definitely most shocking indeed to watch! One fervently expects that the Delhi police will at least now always make sure that in the future such lapses are not made ever, as has been pointed out so manifestly by the Delhi High Court in this praiseworthy judgement!
Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col (Retd) BPS Sirohi, A - 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.
