The Allahabad High Court has pulled up the authorities of a district jail in Siddharth Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, for keeping a man in illegal confinement for eight months because his middle name was missing from the bail order, Bar and Bench reported on Monday. A single-judge bench of Justice JJ Munir berated the “reprehensible conduct” of the jail superintendent and issued him a stern warning.
In an order passed on December 7, the court noted that superintendent Rakesh Singh had refused to comply with the order for the man’s release – passed in April – only because the name of the applicant in order was “Vinod Baruaar”, whereas in the remand sheet, it was “Vinod Kumar Baruaar”.
The court expressed its displeasure at the fact that its orders were “flouted with impunity”.
“It is on that small technicality that the Jail Superintendent/Jailer has flouted the bail order of this Court by refusing to release the applicant,” Justice Munir said. “This 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 High Court said the conduct of the jail superintendent “was not only reprehensible, but also contumacious”. It added that the sole purpose of not complying with the bail orders prima facie appeared to be “an obstinate attitude of the jail administration in carrying out the orders of this court”.
In the process, the jail authorities had deprived a citizen of his liberty “without any just or reasonable cause” for eight months since April, the bench noted.
The Allahabad HC ordered the release of Vinod Baruaar within 24 hours, in terms of the bail order dated April 9. The court further sought a compliance report on the matter.
Superintendent Singh was also directed to appear before the court and explain why appropriate departmental inquiry may not be recommended against him. Singh then filed an affidavit stating that the applicant was released from prison on December 8. The court said that it was “reluctantly” accepting the explanation offered by the jail superintendent. But “he is warned to remain careful in future”, Justice Munir said.
Limited-time offer: Big stories, small price. Keep independent media alive. Become a Scroll member today!
Our journalism is for everyone. But you can get special privileges by buying an annual Scroll Membership. Sign up today!