PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad High Court has warned the superintendent of district jail, Siddharthnagar, to be careful in future in the matter of release of applicants on orders passed by the court. The jail superintendent had kept a man in illegal confinement for eight months as his middle name, Kumar, was missing in the bail order.
As per the earlier direction of the court, Siddharthnagar District Jail Superintendent Rakesh Singh appeared before it and filed an affidavit stating the applicant has been released from prison on December 8, 2020. 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 release of the applicant is reluctantly accepted. The personal presence of jail superintendent is exempted. He is warned to be careful in future.”
The applicant’s name in bail order was mentioned as ‘Vinod Baruaar’, whose bail application was earlier rejected by Siddharthanagar additional sessions judge on September 4, 2019. Hence, he filed a bail application before the high court.
On April 9, 2020, the high court directed his release on bail. But he was not released from jail, as the jail authorities refused to comply with the release order passed in this case because the name mentioned in the release order was ‘Vinod Baruaar’, whereas in the remand sheet his name is ‘Vinod Kumar Baruaar’.
Earlier, while hearing a name correction application moved by the applicant, the court took serious note of non-release of applicant on small technicality and directed release of applicant.
The court summoned the jail superintendent/ jailer of Siddharthnagar district jail observing, “It is on small technicality that the jail superintendent/jailer has flouted the bail order of high court by refusing to release the applicant.”
The court directed that after complying with the order, the jail superintendent/jailer shall appear before this court and explain why appropriate departmental inquiry may not be recommended against him.