When Police Choose a Side: A Pregnant Woman’s Eight-Month Fight for Justice in Mirzapur

When police choose a side, then there is zero possibility of justice. This is clearly illustrated by the case of Archana Dubey Mirzapur. Indeed, the implications of such bias in law enforcement are profound and far-reaching, affecting not just the immediate situation but also the broader community’s trust in the justice system. When those sworn to protect and serve align themselves with one party, it fundamentally undermines their role as impartial enforcers of the law. Consequently, this can lead to a culture of fear and resentment among the public, where individuals feel that their complaints will not be taken seriously or that justice will not be served. In the case of Archana Dubey, the blatant disregard for neutrality may have significantly altered the course of the investigation, ultimately leaving unanswered questions and unresolved grievances among those seeking justice.

The Night That Changed Everything

On October 24, 2025, obviously, I was away from my home in Ghurahu Patti, Mirzapur. As a result of it, a group of people I had once called family broke the locks of my residence that day. They walked in as if the house already belonged to them. By the time I returned, my room was utterly empty. Gold jewelry worth nearly Rs. 8 lakh was gone. In addition, my washing machine, my refrigerator, my television, and my cooler — the small comforts of a home I had spent years building — had also disappeared. Meanwhile, the offenders fitted new locks of their own, sealing me out of my own house.

I was seven months pregnant at the time; consequently, my nine-year-old daughter watched her home disappear in a single afternoon.

The law is not ambiguous about what should happen next: police register a First Information Report, they investigate, and subsequently, they restore the rightful occupant’s possession. However, that is not what transpired here. Instead, the local police chose, deliberately and repeatedly, to look the other way.

A Crime Rebranded as a “Family Dispute”: How Police Choose a Side Through Language

The central sleight of hand in this case has been linguistic. Indeed, language, rather than force, is often how police choose a side first. Subsequently, breaking locks and entering a residence by force,and carrying away Rs. 8 lakh in valuables is undoubtedly not a family disagreement. Rather, it is daylight robbery and criminal trespass under the law. Nevertheless, the Circle Officer, City, Mirzapur, described it differently in his investigation report dated 18 February 2026: a “family property dispute.” Consequently, he advised me to seek relief in civil court instead.

This is not a mere technicality. Rather, a criminal classification triggers an FIR, whereas a civil one allows the file to disappear into a cabinet. Furthermore, this classification disregards a fundamental principle of Indian law: no person, regardless of the strength of their claim to a property, may evict another occupant by force. Evidently, a court decree has the authority to effectuate such an eviction. Up till now, no civil court has ordered my eviction. Consequently, no decree exists anywhere in this case. Ultimately, nothing but sheer force was responsible for putting those new locks on my door.

The Evidence That Was Never Collected: Silence as a Way to Choose a Side

Obviously, my husband had installed a CCTV system to protect our home. Moreover, It recorded everything: the breaking of the locks, the theft, and the assault that followed. Evidently, I gave the police purchase and repair receipts to prove our ownership of that system. Repeatedly, I told them exactly where the DVR was.

Eight months later, the accused still hold that DVR. Police have never seized it, despite every opportunity to do so. Unlike testimony, digital evidence does not shift or soften with time — which may be exactly why no one in this case has ever collected it.

Twenty-Four Grievances, One Answer: The Paper Trail of a Police Force That Chose a Side

Since November 2025, I have filed twenty-four separate grievances through India’s public grievance portals: the state IGRS system, and, on one occasion, the Prime Minister’s own portal. Significantly, officials have closed twenty of them. Almost every single one, moreover, carries some version of the same boilerplate remark in Hindi: claiming that officers “submitted” an inquiry report “for perusal.” Meanwhile, it is important to note that no fresh investigation follows. Consequently, no one registers an FIR. Additionally, no one ever answers the specific, documented questions I keep raising.

Two different Circle Officers, months apart, looked at the same facts; nevertheless, both reached an identical conclusion, notably echoing the language of the same closed file. Furthermore, at one point, officials updated the portal itself to mark my case “Can Appeal: No,” effectively shutting the one formal door I had left for escalation.

Coincidence does not produce a pattern this consistent. Instead, this is what institutional indifference looks like once it repeats often enough to become procedure.

The Question Nobody Will Answer

There is one question I have put to the Superintendent of Police, Mirzapur, repeatedly. However, no one has ever answered it. If my family “voluntarily” left this property, as the police insist, then why does the electricity company still bill that connection in my husband’s name? Moreover, the current amount, which exceeds Rs. 13,000, reflects consumption we are not there to use.

Someone is living in that house. Someone is running that meter. That someone is not us. A single, mundane utility bill contradicts the official story more effectively than any legal argument could — because it is a piece of documentary proof, not an assertion.

When “No Evidence” Meets a Bribe Request: The Clearest Sign of All

Perhaps the most serious admission in this entire record does not come from me. Instead, it comes from the portal’s own dropdown menu. Three separate times, when asked to state my reason for dissatisfaction with a closed grievance, I selected: “Bribe was asked from me.” Each time, the same notation appeared beside it: “Can Appeal: No.”

This is no longer a story about bureaucratic sloth. Rather, it is a documented, repeated allegation of solicitation by public servants, and I filed it through an official state channel. That makes it a matter for anti-corruption authorities, not simply another line item in a property dispute.

What Comes Next: Asking the State to Choose the Law Instead

I have exhausted the ordinary channels available to an ordinary citizen. First, I filed with the State Human Rights Commission, whose own directive from December 2025 ordered the police to act within six weeks while keeping me informed; the police have ignored that directive too. More recently, I wrote directly to the Chief Minister’s office.

What I am asking for has never changed. Firstly, police should register the FIR that the law requires. Additionally, they should seize the evidence that has sat, untouched, for eight months. Moreover, someone should investigate the officers who have closed the same file over and over without ever truly opening it. Above all, the state should recognize a simple fact: the offenders forced a pregnant woman and a nine-year-old child out of their own home; that is not a “family matter” for paperwork to manage. Ultimately, they are victims of a crime, still waiting for the state to notice.

Justice delayed this many times, across this many months, no longer looks like an accident. Instead, it looks like a choice: a case of police choosing a side, over and over, closure after closure. I am still waiting for someone in Mirzapur to choose the law instead.

---

This account reflects the author’s own complaints and documentation filed with the Uttar Pradesh Human Rights Commission, alongside the IGRS/CPGRAMS grievance portals, and furthermore, the Mirzapur police records between November 2025 and July 2026.

Here’s the compiled directory of Application IDs and contact details for every authority involved in your case, based on both your documents and current official sources.

1. Grievance / Application Registration Numbers (IGRS/CPGRAMS) (When Police Choose a Side)

#	Registration No.	Status
1	GOVUP/E/2026/0091449	Grievance received (17/07/2026)
2	GOVUP/E/2026/0091446	Grievance received (17/07/2026)
3	GOVUP/E/2026/0078037	Under process
4	GOVUP/E/2026/0078033	Under process
5	GOVUP/E/2026/0078030	Closed
6	GOVUP/E/2026/0078025	Closed
7	GOVUP/E/2026/0072237	Closed
8	GOVUP/E/2026/0051084	Closed
9	GOVUP/E/2026/0037912	Closed
10	GOVUP/E/2026/0032023	Closed
11	GOVUP/E/2026/0032000	Closed
12	GOVUP/E/2026/0028594	Closed
13–24	0018736, 0018732, 0015210, 0012010, 0012000, 0003751, 2025/0147964, 2025/0146016, 2025/0136503, 2025/0136498, PMOPG/E/2025/0177329, 2025/0131964	All closed

Portals: UP IGRS/Jansunwai — jansunwai.up.nic.in · Central CPGRAMS — pgportal.gov.in

2. Superintendent of Police, Mirzapur (respondent authority) (When Police Choose a Side)

Field	Detail
Officer	Shri Somen Verma, IPS
Email	spmzr-up[at]nic[dot]in
Phone	9454400299
Office address	Ramaipatti, Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh – 231001
Website	uppolice.gov.in

DIG Vindhyachal Range (next level up): Furthermore, Shri Rakesh Prakash Singh, IPS — digrmir[at]nic[dot]in — 9454400215

3. Chief Minister’s Secretariat (IGRS officer handling your case) (When Police Choose a Side)

Field	Detail
Officer	Shri Arvind Mohan, Joint Secretary
Email	arvind.12574[at]gov[dot]in
Phone	0522-2226350
Address	Room No. 321, U.P. Secretariat, Lucknow

4. Uttar Pradesh Human Rights Commission (SHRC) (When Police Choose a Side)

Field	Detail
Address	Manav Adhikar Bhawan, TC-34, V-1, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow – 226010
Phone	0522-2728109
Fax	0522-2305808
Email	uphrclko@yahoo.co.in
Website	uphrc.up.nic.in

5. National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) (When Police Choose a Side)

Field	Detail
Address	Manav Adhikar Bhawan, Block-C, GPO Complex, INA, New Delhi – 110023
Facilitation Centre	011-24651330 / 24663333
Complaints mobile (24 hrs)	9810298900
Fax	011-24651332
Email	cr.nhrc@nic.in
Website	nhrc.nic.in

6. Electricity Discom — Correction Needed

Your bill lists the discom as “Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (PUVNL)” — note this is PuVVNL (Purvanchal, serving eastern UP including Mirzapur), not PVVNL (Pashchimanchal, which serves western UP/Meerut). I’d used “PVVNL” in earlier drafts by mistake, matching the shorthand in your bill — worth correcting in any future filing. (When Police Choose a Side)

Field	Detail
Company	Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (PuVVNL)
Head office	DLW Bhikharipur, Varanasi – 221004
Phone	0542-2318348
Toll-free (power complaints)	1912
Toll-free (customer support)	1800-180-5025
Website	puvvnl.in

7. UP Anti-Corruption Organisation (for the bribery track) (When Police Choose a Side)

Field	Detail
Address	7th Floor, 3rd Tower, Signature Building, Police HQ, Gomti Nagar Extension, Lucknow
Complaint number	9454402484
Email	aco@nic.in

Want me to fold this directory into the tracking log as a new “Contacts” sheet, or produce it as a standalone one-page reference document?

Here are the full web links for each authority:

Authority	Web Link
UP IGRS / Jansunwai Portal	http://jansunwai.up.nic.in/
Central CPGRAMS Portal	https://pgportal.gov.in/
Uttar Pradesh Police (SP Mirzapur, DIG Vindhyachal profiles)	https://uppolice.gov.in/
Mirzapur District Police Contact Directory	https://mirzapur.nic.in/divisions/police-contact-details/
UP State Human Rights Commission (SHRC)	https://uphrc.up.nic.in/
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)	https://nhrc.nic.in/
NHRC — Contact/Office Address page	https://nhrc.nic.in/contact-us/office-address
Purvanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (PuVVNL)	https://puvvnl.in/
UP Anti-Corruption Organisation (via UP Police site)	https://uppolice.gov.in/pages/en/topmenu/police-units/anti-corruption-org/en-anti-corruption-org
UP Chief Minister’s Office / Secretariat (general portal)	https://cmup.nic.in/ (verify before relying on this — not directly confirmed in my search, so check it loads correctly before using)