Allahabad HC Slams Police Delay; Orders Timely Reports To Speed Up Bail Hearings

The Allahabad High Court has directed the Uttar Pradesh DGP to issue a circular instructing all district police chiefs to provide information sought by government lawyers on bail matters without delay. The court said timely reports are essential to prevent unnecessary postponement of hearings.

The bench of Justice Arun Singh Deshwal issued the order while granting conditional bail to applicant Vinod Ram. The court noted that the applicant deserved bail earlier, but police delays kept him in jail for an additional month.

The court criticised the concerned police officials for failing to provide the required information to the government counsel. It said an accused’s liberty cannot be curtailed simply because police officers neglect their duty.

The Bansdih Road police station in Ballia registered a case against the applicant under BNS sections 140(1), 61(2), and 238.

During the October 8 hearing, the court directed the AGA to obtain instructions regarding the investigation and the recovery of the abducted person, Ram Niwas Ram.

However, on November 17, the government counsel informed the court that the SSP Ballia had not provided any instructions despite receiving repeated letters. The court termed this failure as an interference with justice and described the conduct as  ‘contemptuous.’

Strict Compliance Directed

The court summoned the SSP personally. On November 25, the SSP filed an affidavit admitting that the letter was received and stating that the investigating officer failed to submit the required information.

The SSP informed the court that a preliminary inquiry had begun against Sub-Inspector Mahendra Rawat. He also stated that he had suspended the officer pending investigation.

Police explained that despite extensive efforts, the abducted person’s body had not been found. They suspect the accused may have thrown him into the Saryu River from a bridge.

Justice Deshwal observed that due to the investigating officer’s negligence, the applicant’s bail plea remained pending for more than a month. The court considered imposing costs on the state and directing compensation for the applicant.

The Additional Advocate General requested that the court not to impose the cost and assured that the state would ensure timely instructions in the future. Based on this assurance, the court refrained from imposing compensation.

The court also found no evidence linking the applicant to the abducted victim. The court noted that investigators had named him solely on a co-accused’s statement.

It added that the charge sheet was filed and the applicant had no criminal history.

The court issued instructions to send all future bail orders directly to jails through the OMB system. It directed officials to follow this process without delay.

Also Read: Supreme Court Gives A Big Decision In Favour Of Divorced Muslim Women