The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed serious displeasure over the fact that an accused, who was granted bail about two months ago, has still not been released from the Ghaziabad District Jail, allegedly because the order did not mention the sub-station of the provision under which he was accused.
A bench of Justices KV Vishwanathan and NK Singh directed the Superintendent Jailor of Ghaziabad District Jail to appear in the person, and Uttar Pradesh’s Director General of Police (Jail) to find out through video conferencing to find out what exactly happened.
Justice Vishwanathan said, “Do not take the given to the Supreme Court,” Justice Vishwanathan said.
Justice Vishwanathan also warned the petitioner that it would take action against him. If it is found that non-relief was due to some other reason, such as detention Justice Vishwanathan in another case also warned that the court would start contempt proceedings against the officials when the petitioner’s claim is true.
In its order, the court said, “The case presents a very unfortunate landscape.”
The petitioner, the bench said, was released on bail on April 29, 2025 by his order. “The order is categorized and said that the petitioner will be released on bail during the trial pendency,” can determine the FIR registered in the FIR registered in the FIR registered under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and can determine more conditions on the 2021, conditions and conditions.
“After this order, Additional District and Sessions Judge … Ghaziabad, issued a release order to the Superintendent, Ghaziabad District Jail, in which the Superintendent was authorized and needed to release the accused from custody after submitting a bail bond in connection with another case,” the order said.
The story continues below this advertisement
“After this order, it has been said by the petitioner that he is unable to secure his freedom, as in the High Court and the order of this court, section 5 of the 2021 Act was left (1) of Section 5, and because of this the petitioner could not be issued. Therefore, the petitioner now demands an order of April 29, 2025, especially.
The bench said that in the April 29 order “the respective classes are clearly mentioned”. “It is a visit to justice that the petitioner was ordered to be released on the basis that the sub-section was not mentioned, he is placed behind the bars. It calls for a serious inquiry. We are directly superintended jailers, district jail, Ghaziabad, personalities. In addition, DGP will appear on the Jail Video,” said the bench said.
,
