The Supreme Court of India has strongly criticized the Uttar Pradesh Police for how it handled a molestation case in Bulandshahr. The court questioned why the police registered a case against an "unknown person" when the alleged accused had already been caught at the spot.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva made these sharp observations while hearing a plea. The plea sought the cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to an accused in the molestation case.
Supreme Court Slams UP Police Investigation in Bulandshahr Molestation Case
The court did not hold back its criticism. The bench said the police's approach raised serious questions about the credibility of the investigation.
"Toeing the line is one thing but bending over is another. And this kind of cover-up job? Less said the better." — Supreme Court bench
The court took note of the petitioner's submission. According to the petitioner, the police had initially registered an FIR against an "unknown" motorcycle rider. This happened even though the alleged accused had been apprehended at the spot.
Court Warns of Handing Over UP Police Probes to CBI
The Supreme Court went a step further. It warned that it could consider handing over UP Police probes to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
This warning signals the court's deep concern about how the state police is conducting its investigations. The bench made it clear that it is watching closely.
- The court questioned why an FIR was filed against an unknown person when the accused was already caught
- The bench raised doubts about the credibility of the investigation
- The court warned it may transfer UP Police probes to the CBI
- The observations came during a hearing on a plea to cancel anticipatory bail
Our Take: Why This Supreme Court Rebuke Matters
In our view, this is a serious moment for policing in Uttar Pradesh. When the Supreme Court uses words like "cover-up job," it is not a minor criticism. It points to a pattern where investigations may be manipulated to protect the accused.
To put it plainly, the court is asking a simple question: if the accused was caught at the spot, why was the FIR filed against an unknown person? This is not a small procedural error. It goes to the heart of whether justice is being done.
The warning about handing over cases to the CBI is significant. It means the Supreme Court does not trust the UP Police to investigate its own cases fairly in this matter. For ordinary citizens, this raises a bigger concern — if the police can do this in one case, how many other cases might be mishandled?
What should readers take away from this? First, the Supreme Court is actively monitoring how state police handle sensitive cases. Second, when investigations are not done properly, the highest court can and will step in. Third, this case shows that the credibility of the UP Police is now under direct judicial scrutiny.
The court's remarks should serve as a warning not just to the UP Police but to all investigating agencies. Toeing the line means following the law. Bending over means something else entirely — and the Supreme Court has made it clear it will not tolerate that.
