38.6c New Delhi, India, Wednesday, September 27, 2023
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
About Us Contact Us

'Mistake pointed by the Jail Authorities must invite severe punishment': Allahabad HC in case of Man Confined in Prison for 8 Month Even After Getting Bail [READ ORDER]

By Dev Kumar Patel Dev Kumar Patel      Dec 22, 2020      0 Comments      1,717 Views
'Mistake pointed by the Jail Authorities must invite severe punishment': Allahabad HC in case of Man Confined in Prison for 8 Month Even After Getting Bail [READ ORDER]

The Allahabad High Court in terse note, reprimanded the conduct of the Jailer/Jail Superintendent, who refused to release the applicant, Vinod Baruaar by calling the action "not only reprehensible, but also contumacious".

Hon'ble Justice J.J. Munir, directed The Jail Superintendent/Jailer, to comply with the order, and appear before this Court and explain why appropriate departmental inquiry may not be recommended against him.

The Applicant prayed before the Allahabad High Court to correct the applicant's name, which is shown as "Vinod Baruaar" in the cause title of the bail application and also in the rejection order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C.-II, Siddharthnagar, in Bail Application No. 731 of 2019, may be corrected to "Vinod Kumar Baruaar".

While hearing the application, the court took serious note that the Jail Superintendent/Jailer has flouted the bail order on small technicality of this Court by refusing to release the applicant. 

Under these circumstances, the applicant made an application for correction of the applicant's name to the learned Trial Judge, who logically refused to correct the name in the release order, contrary to the order passed by the High Court.

Court Observations:

The high court made certain observations regarding the flouting of order for small technicality which is as follows:

The Court remarked in its order that it does not appreciate our orders being flouted with impunity. The Court fails to understand that when the applicant's name mentioned in the bail rejection order is "Vinod Baruaar", then why "Kumar" must be added to the name mentioned in the bail order, in order to make it effectual. 

The Court noted that this kind of a trifling of mistake pointed by the Jail Authorities must invite severe punishment, unless there is a serious doubt or dispute about the identity of the applicant. That, apparently, is not the case here.

The Court further observed that the sole purpose of not complying with the bail orders for all these eight months appears to be, prima facie, an obstinate attitude of the jail administration in carrying out the orders of this Court. In the process, they have deprived a citizen of his liberty, without any just or reasonable cause, since April, 2020 till date. 

In addition to this, the court also remarked that “This illegal deprivation of liberty is patently an illegal confinement and that too, during these perilous CoViD-19 times.”

Court Order:

The High Court while rejecting the correction application passed an order which is as follows:

  • That the applicant, Vinod Baruaar, with that name, shall be forthwith released upon a release order to be passed by learned Special Judge (Rape and POCSO Act Cases), Court No. 2, Siddharthnagar within the time period of 24 hours.
  • In terms of the bail order dated 09.04.2020 passed by this Court. The Jailer/Jail Superintendent, wherever the applicant is interned, shall, in compliance with the release order passed by the learned Special Judge (Rape and POCSO Act Cases), Court No. 2, Siddharthnagar, forthwith release the applicant, without raising any objection about absence of "Kumar" to his name.

Jail superintendent, Rakesh Singh, appeared before the court and filed an affidavit stating the applicant had been released from the prison on December 8.

The court took the affidavit of compliance on record.

Justice J.J. Munir said: "This court has perused the affidavit filed by the jail superintendent. The explanation furnished for non-compliance of this court's order, and, in consequence, delaying the release of the applicant is reluctantly accepted."



Share this article:

Leave a feedback about this




Lawstreet Advertisement

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email