‘Police can’t become judge’: Rajasthan High Court bans shaming of accused on social media in ‘ship of Theseus’ ruling

Justice Farjand Ali directed strict adherence to the SOPs and warned that any violation would invite action against erring officials.

“The manner in which such media trials are operationalised through practices that can only be described as institutional humiliation, wholly inconsistent with the constitutional promise of dignity. The act of parading an accused before the media, the capturing and dissemination of photographs or videos within the confines of a police station, and the convening of press briefings wherein guilt is insinuated or declared, together constitute a systematic erosion of the individual’s dignity and reputation,” the Rajasthan High Court said on May 5.

“The power to investigate does not encompass the power to declare guilt,” the court said in one of the key observations of the judgment delivered on May 5.

Police can’t become judge: Court

• This court cannot remain a silent spectator to a situation where the police, under the guise of transparency or public accountability, arrogates unto itself the role of judge in the court of public opinion.
• The doctrine of constitutional morality, which permeates the entire constitutional framework, mandates that every action of the state must conform to the principles of fairness, reasonableness, and respect for individual dignity.
• Any act that falls foul of these principles cannot be justified on grounds of administrative expediency or public sentiment, the Rajasthan High Court stated.
• The argument that such disclosures are necessary to maintain public confidence in the police is fundamentally flawed, for confidence in the justice system is not built upon spectacle, but upon adherence to due process and the rule of law.
• The police, being an instrumentality of the state, is bound by constitutional discipline and cannot transgress into domains reserved exclusively for the judiciary.

‘Ship of Theseus’ reference

In an unusual philosophical reference, the judgment began with the famous “ship of Theseus” paradox, questioning whether an object remains the same after all its parts are replaced. Later in the ruling, the Rajasthan High Court used the analogy to explain the deep psychological impact of institutional humiliation.

“A person, once exposed to such degradation, does not remain the same thereafter,” the court observed while discussing the long-term effects of public shaming and digital stigma.

Protest case triggered petition

The case originates from a First Information Report (FIR) registered on July 10, 2025 at Sadar Police Station in Jaisalmer following unrest during proceedings conducted by an executive magistrate in Basanpeer Juni village.

The petitioners were booked under sections 170 and 126 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). Section 126 allows Executive Magistrates to demand security/bonds for keeping peace, while Section 170 enables police to arrest individuals to prevent cognisable offences.

The accused approached the Rajasthan High Court alleging that after their arrest, police officials forced them to sit in degrading conditions, photographed and videographed them, and uploaded the content online, exposing them to “social condemnation” and damaging their dignity and reputation.

The petitioners argued that such acts amounted to unlawful punishment without trial and violated the constitutional guarantee of dignity, privacy and fair trial.

Court takes strong view on public humiliation

• The Rajasthan High Court said the practice of publicly parading accused persons has become “alarmingly routine”.
• It noted allegations that accused persons are sometimes made to sit outside police stations, stripped to their undergarments, photographed and then publicly projected as criminals before any judicial determination of guilt.
• An accused is “merely an accused and not a convict”, the Rajasthan High Court said, adding that the constitutional presumption of innocence remains intact until a competent court records a finding of guilt after a fair trial.
• The judgment stressed that Article 21 guarantees not merely life but the right to live with dignity, honour and self-respect.
• The right to dignity “does not evaporate upon arrest”, the Rajasthan High Court observed.
• It warned that once humiliating photographs are uploaded online, the stigma often becomes permanent even if the accused is eventually acquitted.
• In the digital age, the consequences of such actions are “neither fleeting nor reversible”, the court said while describing the psychological and reputational harm caused by public exposure.

Directions issued by court

• Disposing of the petition, the Rajasthan High Court issued a series of directions aimed at curbing police-driven “social trials”.
• The court directed strict adherence to all SOPs and warned that any violation would invite action against erring officials.
• It specifically prohibited police personnel from publicly parading accused persons, disrobing or humiliating them, sharing photographs or videos of accused persons on social media, facilitating social media condemnation and engaging in any conduct amounting to extra-legal punishment.
• The Rajasthan High Court also directed authorities to prominently display these guidelines as “Do’s and Don’ts” in all police stations and on official police and home department websites to ensure institutional accountability and public awareness.

SOPs, compliance reports filed

During earlier proceedings on January 20, 2026, the Rajasthan High Court had directed the superintendent of police (SP), Jaisalmer and the commissioner of police, Jodhpur to immediately remove all photographs and related content of arrested persons from social media platforms and submit compliance reports.

In response, the Jaisalmer SP informed the court that all such photographs had been removed and instructions issued to ensure dignified treatment of accused persons.

He, however, denied allegations of humiliation or coercion and claimed the photographs had been taken only for official purposes.

The commissioner of police, Jodhpur also submitted that fresh guidelines had been issued prohibiting public humiliation, circulation of photographs and media exposure of accused persons.

The Rajasthan High Court, additionally, took note of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) issued by the Rajasthan Police on January 21, directing police officers to treat arrested persons in a humane and dignified manner and prohibiting the sharing of their photographs or videos on social media, police platforms or through the press.

Supreme Court rulings cited

The Rajasthan High Court relied upon several Supreme Court precedents, including D K Basu v State of West Bengal, Sunil Batra v Delhi Administration and State of Maharashtra v Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi.

The judgment also referred to the Law Commission of India’s 200th report on “Trial by Media” which warned against prejudicial publicity contaminating criminal trials and destroying reputations even before adjudication.