The key takeaway from this blog post is that :
the RTI application filed by Shivam Gupta is a strategic challenge against “mechanical” policing—specifically the practice of using preventive law (now under the BNSS) to penalize victims of a crime.
Core Insights:
- Victim vs. Aggressor: The case highlights a common grievance where police, instead of purely investigating an FIR (No. 58), use preventive notices (Section 126/135 BNSS) to force both parties—including the victims—to furnish bail bonds.
- Legal Accountability: By citing the 2021 Uttar Pradesh government guidelines, the applicant reminds the authorities that illegal detention or harassment under preventive sections can lead to a ₹25,000 compensation liability.
- The “Right to Reason”: The blog emphasizes that administrative actions are not valid unless they are backed by sound logic. The RTI demands that the police explain why victims are being treated as threats to public peace.
- Transparency as a Shield: The request for General Diary (GD) entries and investigation progress reports serves to prevent the police from suppressing the original criminal case through administrative delay or bias.
Would you like me to help you prepare for the next step, such as drafting a checklist of documents you’ll need if you have to file a First Appeal?
This structured blog post analyzes the RTI application filed by Shivam Gupta against the Superintendent of Police Office, Mirzapur. It explores the intersection of preventive law, police accountability, and the transition from the CrPC to the BNSS.
The Thin Line Between Prevention and Harassment: Analyzing the Mirzapur RTI Case
In a robust democracy, the Right to Information (RTI) serves as a vital tool for citizens to hold administrative bodies accountable. A recent RTI application filed by Shivam Gupta in Mirzapur (Registration No: SPMZR/R/2025/60121) highlights a growing concern in the Indian legal landscape: the potential misuse of “preventive measures” by local police and executive magistrates.
At the heart of this case lies a paradox—why are victims of a registered crime being treated as potential lawbreakers under preventive sections of the law?
1. The Context: From FIR to Preventive Notice
On March 8, 2025, FIR No. 58 was registered at Kotwali Katra, Mirzapur. The charges were filed under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS):
- Section 115(2): Voluntarily causing hurt.
- Section 351(2): Criminal intimidation.
- Section 352: Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace.
Despite being the complainants/victims in this FIR, the applicant and his family were subsequently served a notice by the City Magistrate on May 17, 2025, requiring them to furnish a bail bond. This notice was based on a “Chalani Report” submitted by the police under preventive sections—formerly known as Section 107/116 of the CrPC, now transitioned to Sections 126/135 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
2. Understanding the Legal Framework: CrPC vs. BNSS
The application touches upon a critical transition in Indian jurisprudence. For decades, Section 107 of the CrPC allowed Executive Magistrates to require persons to execute a bond if they were likely to “commit a breach of peace.”
Under the new BNSS (2023), these powers remain intact but are categorized under different sections. The core issue raised by the applicant is that these are quasi-judicial proceedings. They are meant to be preventive, not punitive. When the police recommend these proceedings against the same individuals who filed an FIR for being assaulted, it raises a significant question: Is the law being used to suppress the victim?
3. The “Right to Reason” and Administrative Accountability
One of the most profound points in Gupta’s RTI request is the demand for the “Right to Reason.” In Indian administrative law, “Reasoned Decisions” are a fundamental requirement. The applicant is seeking the specific logic used by the Inspector of Kotwali Katra to recommend preventive action against the victims of a crime.
- The Conflict: If an FIR (No. 58) already exists to address the criminal act, why is a parallel preventive case being built against the victim?
- The Risk: Such practices often lead to “cross-cases” or “pressure tactics,” where the aggressor uses police influence to force the victim into a compromise by entangling them in bail bond requirements.
4. Compensation for Illegal Detention: The 2021 Guidelines
The RTI application references a landmark 2021 guideline issued by the Uttar Pradesh government following directions from the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court.
Key Provision: In cases of illegal detention under Section 107/116/151, the victim is entitled to a compensation of ₹25,000.
This guideline was introduced to curb the “mechanical” manner in which Executive Magistrates often sign off on police reports without verifying if a real threat to public peace exists. By invoking this in the RTI, the applicant is effectively putting the Public Information Officer (PIO) and the ASP (Operation) on notice regarding potential legal liability.
5. Information Sought: Five Pillars of Transparency
The applicant has requested five specific points of information that every citizen should know they are entitled to:
- General Diary (GD) Entries: The daily record of police activity regarding the case.
- Opposite Party Details: Whether the actual accused in the FIR have also been served similar notices.
- The Second Party Notice: Transparency regarding the “other side” of the dispute.
- Investigation Progress: The name and designation of the Investigating Officer (IO) and the current status of FIR No. 58.
- Justification for Preventive Action: The specific reason for serving notice to the victims.
6. Conclusion: The Role of the PIO
The designated PIO, Om Prakash Singh (ASP Operation), is now under a statutory obligation to provide this information within 30 days. This case serves as a reminder that the police must balance their power to maintain peace with the individual’s right to justice.
Preventive law should be a shield for society, not a sword used by the police to neutralize complainants. As this RTI progresses, it will be a test of whether the Mirzapur police department upholds the spirit of the Right to Information Act, 2005, or hides behind administrative silence.
Summary of Key Details for Reference
| Detail | Information |
| Registration No. | SPMZR/R/2025/60121 |
| Public Authority | SP Office, Mirzapur |
| Relevant FIR | No. 58, Dated 08/03/2025 |
| Key Sections | 115(2), 351(2), 352 BNS; 126/135 BNSS |
Based on the official records of the Uttar Pradesh Police and the details provided in your application, here is the structured contact information for the concerned public authorities.
1. Key Public Information Officer (PIO)
The officer currently handling your RTI request as per your filing details:
- Name: Om Prakash Singh
- Designation: Additional Superintendent of Police (ASP), Operation
- Mobile Number: +91-9125608556 / +91-9454401105 (Official CUG)
- Email Address: aspopmzp@gmail.com / asp-op.mi@up.gov.in
2. Nodal Officer Details
The Nodal Officer oversees the coordination of RTI applications within the district:
- Name: Om Prakash Singh (In many districts, the ASP Operation acts as the Nodal head)
- Mobile Number: +91-9125608556
- Email Address: addlspopmzr@gmail.com
3. District Police Leadership (Supervisory Authority)
If you do not receive a response within 30 days, or if the information is unsatisfactory, you may need to contact or mark a copy to the senior leadership:
| Office | Name of Officer | Mobile (CUG) | Email ID |
| DIG/SP Mirzapur | Shri Somen Barma | +91-9454400299 | spmzr-up@nic.in |
| ASP City | Shri Nitesh Singh | +91-9454401104 | asp-city.mi@up.gov.in |
| CO City (Katra Area) | Shri Vivek Jawla | +91-9454401590 | co-city.mi@up.gov.in |
4. Official Web Links
For tracking your application or filing a First Appeal, use the following portals:
- UP Police Official Website (Mirzapur Unit): uppolice.gov.in
- Online RTI UP Portal (For Appeals/Tracking): rtionline.up.gov.in
- UP Police RTI Manuals: RTI Section – UP Police
Pro Tip: When communicating via email, always mention your Registration Number (SPMZR/R/2025/60121) in the subject line to ensure it is linked to your existing file.
Would you like me to draft a formal reminder email that you can send to the ASP Operation if the 30-day period is approaching its end?
Facing a similar challenge? Share the details in the box below, and our team of experts will do their best to help.