New Delhi: The Allahabad high court has warned district police chiefs in Uttar Pradesh of contempt action if Supreme Court guidelines on encounters are not strictly followed, LiveLaw reported.Justice Arun Kumar Deshwal issued the warning while observing that police officers often inflicted firearm injuries on the legs of the accused to gain “fame on social media” or out-of-turn promotions. The court took strong exception to this practice, colloquially referred to as ‘half encounters’, noting that the power to punish lies within the domain of the judiciary, not the executive.“India is a democratic country. It has to be run as per the ethos and directions of the constitution of India which clearly distinguishes the role of legislature, executive and judiciary,” the bench observed.Strict complianceThe court clarified that the superintendents of police (SP), senior superintendents of police (SSP), and commissioners would be personally liable for contempt if the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. State of Maharashtra (2014) were violated within their jurisdiction.The order was passed while allowing the bail application of an accused who had sustained grievous injuries in a police engagement. The court noted that in the present case, no police officer had sustained any injury, which raised questions regarding the “necessity and proportionality of the use of firearms”.New guidelinesStating that the police in Uttar Pradesh frequently ignored mandatory procedures, the bench issued six specific directions to be followed in cases where an accused suffers grievous injury:Registration of FIR: If an accused or any person receives grievous injuries in a police firing, an FIR must be registered by the head of the police party. The investigation must be conducted by the CBCID or a team from another police station under the supervision of an officer at least one level above the head of the police party involved.Naming conventions: The names of the police personnel involved need not be mentioned in the category of accused/suspect in the FIR; only the team name (e.g., STF or regular police) is required.Medical aid: The injured person must be provided medical aid and their statement recorded by a Magistrate or Medical Officer after a fitness certificate is obtained.Judicial oversight: After the investigation, a report must be sent to the competent court, which will follow the procedure mandated in the PUCL judgment.No immediate rewards: Out-of-turn promotions or gallantry awards shall not be granted immediately after an encounter. Such rewards should only be recommended after a committee constituted by the police head establishes gallantry beyond doubt.Grievance redressal: If the family of the injured person finds that the procedure has not been followed or suspects a lack of impartial investigation, they may approach the Sessions Judge. The Sessions Judge is empowered to look into the merit of the complaint and redress the grievance.The court further directed that in cases of flagrant violation of the PUCL guidelines, the sessions judge may refer the matter to the high court to initiate contempt proceedings against the district police chief.Kusum Mishra appeared for the applicant.