Supreme Court probes Noida police after woman lawyer alleges custodial sexual assault

The Supreme Court on December 19 sought responses from the union government and the Uttar Pradesh Police on a petition filed by a woman advocate who has accused police personnel at a Noida police station of custodial sexual assault, molestation, intimidation and illegal detention when she went there to assist a client in filing a complaint.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and N V Anjaria took note of the serious allegations, including claims that CCTV cameras at the Sector 126 police station were deliberately switched off during the incident. The court directed the Gautam Buddha Nagar Police Commissioner to ensure that all CCTV footage from the relevant period is preserved and kept in a sealed cover to prevent any tampering or deletion.

Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Vikas Singh described the incident as “a very gross case” occurring in close proximity to the national capital. “If this can happen in Noida, just imagine the plight of the entire country,” he told the court, stressing the wider implications for rule of law and personal liberty.

The bench, however, questioned why the petitioner had approached the Supreme Court directly under Article 32 instead of the Allahabad High Court, since the matter pertains to Uttar Pradesh. Justice Nath observed that entertaining such petitions could encourage litigants from the National Capital Region to bypass high courts altogether.

Singh responded that the case could be transferred, but urged the court to immediately secure the CCTV evidence, warning that otherwise “all the evidence will be destroyed”.

Singh also pointed out that the bench is already monitoring a suo motu case concerning the absence and malfunctioning of CCTV cameras in police stations in Rajasthan, arguing that the present matter could serve as a test case. “This should be a message for the entire country. This kind of treatment to a lawyer,” he said, underscoring the gravity of the allegations.

Acknowledging the exceptional circumstances, the bench said it would ordinarily not have entertained the plea but was doing so given the seriousness of the allegations and their direct link to the issue of non-functional CCTV cameras. The court also assured protection to the petitioner, remarking that “they will dare not touch her after” its order.

According to the petition, the lawyer was subjected to nearly 14 hours of illegal detention beginning late on December 3, during which she was allegedly sexually assaulted, tortured and coerced by uniformed police personnel inside the police station.

The plea claims she was targeted solely for performing her professional duty and insisting on the mandatory registration of an FIR for her client, who had allegedly been physically assaulted by employees of a news channel.