Delhi court pulls up cops over ‘callousness’

NEW DELHI: Granting interim bail to an accused held under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, a Delhi court pulled up police for “callousness” due to which the application had been lingering for the past several dates.
The court had adjourned the bail hearing the past two times due to lack of a sanction order with respect to intercepted conversations between the accused and others. While the Union home ministry had granted the sanction, Delhi Police failed to include this in the chargesheet. The court said the ACP (special cell) filed a “very hazy and sketchy” reply intimating it that the sanction order was “weeded out” from the records.
“The reply is silent as to how and under what circumstances a copy of the said communication received in the office of the special cell was weeded out. It is also not clear why the copy of the sanction order was not placed on record and what communication, if at all any, was received from the office of the Union home secretary. The reply, unfortunately, raises more queries to be answered rather than help the court resolve the issue,” the court said.
Additional sessions judge Dharmender Rana also directed the Union home secretary to personally look into the matter. The court further directed the special commissioner (special cell) to apprise the court about the circumstances under which the sanction order was weeded out and not placed on record in the chargesheet.
Meanwhile, directing the release of the accused on interim bail till the next date of hearing, the court said “every millisecond of unnecessary detention makes a substantial difference and is tantamount to an unwarranted interference with his rights”.
The accused was arrested for alleged involvement in a fake currency racket. Police relied heavily on intercepted phone calls to make their case against him.
The court said that it was not inclined to pass any orders based on “half-baked information” furnished by the investigating agency, but at the same time, it was quite conscious of the sacrosanct rights of the accused.
“It is clarified that instant interim bail order should not be read as an order on merits and the applicant/accused shall not claim any benefit on account of this order, as it is only an interim measure to contain the damages on account of the investigative agency’s apathy and indolence,” the court said.