PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad High Court has warned the superintendent of the district jail, Siddharthnagar be cautious in the future in regards to releasing applicants under approved orders. The jail superintendent had held a man in illegal confinement for eight months after the HC granted him bail, as his middle name, Kumar, was missing from the bail order.
According to an earlier court-approved order, the Siddharthnagar District Jail Superintendent Rakesh singh appeared before him and submitted an affidavit stating that the applicant had been released from prison on December 8, 2020. The court recorded the affidavit of compliance.
Justice JJ Munir He said: “This court has reviewed the affidavit submitted by the superintendent of the jail. The explanation provided for the failure to comply with the order of this court and consequently the delay in releasing the applicant is reluctantly accepted. The personal presence of the superintendent of the jail is exempt. You are advised to be careful in the future. ”
The applicant’s name on the bail order was mentioned as’Vinod Baruaar‘, whose request for bail was previously rejected by Siddharthanagar Additional Sessions Judge on September 4, 2019. Therefore, he submitted a request for bail to the higher court.
On April 9, 2020, the superior court ordered his release on bail. But he was not released because the prison authorities refused to comply with the release order issued in this case because the name mentioned in the order was’ Vinod Baruaar ‘, while on the preventive detention sheet his name was’Vinod Kumar Baruaar‘.
The court learned of his confinement when it filed a request for a name correction. Upon hearing the application, the court took serious note of his confinement due to a small technicality and ordered the applicant’s release.
The court then summoned the Siddharthnagar District Jail Superintendent and observed: “It is on a small technicality that the Jail Superintendent has disobeyed the superior court bail order by refusing to release the applicant.”
The court ordered that after complying with the order, the jail superintendent appear before him and explain why a proper departmental investigation against him cannot be recommended.
.
