Drooid Logo
Back to story perspectives

Full Breakdown

Supreme Court Orders Action Against Mau District Superintendents Over Trial Delays

By Drooid · · How we work

Supreme Court Criticizes Uttar Pradesh Police in Mau Trial

A two-judge bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R. Mahadevan observed that the prosecution in the Mau criminal case had been “absolutely slack” in producing witnesses. The bench, in an order dated September 21, 2026, directed the Uttar Pradesh state government to initiate departmental proceedings against every Superintendent of Police (SP) who has served in Mau district since 2023.

Background of the 2017 Kidnapping Case

The petition before the Supreme Court stems from the kidnapping of the petitioner’s 14-year-old son on September 27, 2017. The child and his remains have not been found. The case was lodged in 2017, and charges against six accused were framed on March 27, 2023.

Court Orders Departmental Proceedings

The bench noted that, despite the March 2023 charge sheet, only two of the 54 prosecution witnesses had been examined as of the hearing. It described the prosecuting agency’s effort as lacking “any semblance of seriousness.” Consequently, the Court ordered that departmental action against the Mau SPs be initiated within two weeks of the September 21, 2026 order. The Court also warned that if the charges against the SPs are found to be merely formal, it will act against the competent authority that issued those memos.

Data on Witness Examination

  • 54 prosecution witnesses listed in the charge sheet.
  • 2 witnesses examined since the charges were framed on March 27, 2023.

Next Procedural Steps

The matter was posted for a further hearing on November 16, 2026. The bench required an affidavit, personally affirmed by the Uttar Pradesh Chief Secretary, documenting the action taken against the SPs to be filed before that date. The petition also sought transfer of the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation; the Allahabad High Court had dismissed that request in May 2025, noting that the investigation was concluded and a chargesheet had already been filed.