The Central government on Wednesday approached the Supreme Court challenging the appointment of Director General of Police (DGP) in Jharkhand.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta mentioned the matter before a Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana.
The Union government, in its application, alleged that Jharkhand had acted in “complete defiance” of the Supreme Court’s directions in Prakash Singh v. Union of India while framing its 2025 regulation for selection of the DGP.
The Centre has sought a direction to Jharkhand to comply with the Supreme Court’s directions on DGP appointment. It has further asked for a declaration that appointments made under the State’s 2025 DGP selection regulation are illegal.
The application concerns the “Selection and Appointment of Director General and Inspector General of Police, Jharkhand (Head of the Police Force) Regulation, 2025”, notified by the State on January 8, 2025.
The Centre alleged that the Regulation was framed in violation of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Prakash Singh v. Union of India, particularly orders passed on September 22, 2006, July 3, 2018, January 16, 2019 and March 13, 2019.
As per the plea, Jharkhand had not sought the Supreme Court’s leave before notifying the Regulation, despite the Court having directed that any State or Central legislation or rule contrary to its directions would remain in abeyance and that States could approach the Court if they sought a modification.
Under the July 3, 2018 directions, States were required to send proposals to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) at least three months before the incumbent DGP's retirement. The UPSC was to prepare a panel and the State was to appoint a DGP from that panel.
The Centre also challenged the appointment of Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Anurag Gupta as DGP on February 2, 2025 for a two-year tenure.
According to the Union's application, Gupta had only about three months of service remaining when he was appointed. His date of superannuation was April 30, 2025.
The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), which is the cadre-controlling authority for IPS officers, subsequently opposed Gupta's appointment through letters dated April 22, May 3 and May 23, 2025. The State was also informed that Gupta had superannuated on April 30, states the application.
Gupta later sought voluntary retirement, which was accepted by the Jharkhand government on November 6, 2025.
The plea has also challenged the appointment of IPS officer Tadasha Mishra as DGP on December 30, 2025.
The State had amended the 2025 Regulation through a resolution dated December 29, 2025 to remove the requirement of six months' residual service. Mishra, who was appointed DGP the next day, was due to superannuate on December 31, 2025.
Notably, the appointment had already come under scrutiny before the Supreme Court.
Amicus curiae Raju Ramachandran recently told the Court that appointing Mishra one day before her retirement was contrary to the principles laid down in the Prakash Singh judgments.
The MHA, in a letter dated January 6, 2026, directed Jharkhand to cancel the 2025 Regulation and Mishra's appointment. It had asked the State to initiate the process for appointing a DGP in accordance with the Supreme Court's directions, states the Union's application.
The plea alleges that Jharkhand “selectively” relied on the Prakash Singh judgment to confer a two-year tenure on its DGPs while departing from the Court-mandated selection procedure.
“This constitutes a fundamental misapplication of the law,” states the application.
It argues that the Supreme Court’s directions had to be implemented fully and not selectively.
The Court had on May 19, 2026 noted that an acting DGP was working in Jharkhand and sought a compliance affidavit from the State.
It had also earlier directed Jharkhand to explain why its proposal for appointment of a DGP in accordance with its earlier order had not been forwarded to the UPSC.
[Read Live Coverage]