NEW DELHI: The accused in an abetment of suicide case who got bail from Supreme Court after spending one year in custody had to stay in jail for another one and a half months as lawyers refused to represent him before the trial court in Baghpat in Uttar Pradesh, which was to pass a formal order to release him and impose terms and conditions for the same.Terming the case “very unusual” and “very disturbing” given that its order had remained unimplemented and the accused was in illegal detention for one and a half months, a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Manmohan directed the jail superintendent to release the man immediately on obtaining a personal bond of Rs 10,000 from him.The accused was arrested in Sept last year and granted bail by SC on Sept 28 this year subject to the terms and conditions that the trial court deemed fit and proper to impose. But the court order could not be enforced as advocates refused to represent him in the trial court, probably because the victim in the case was the child of a local lawyer.Alleging the SC’s order was being stonewalled by the local bar association by preventing any lawyer from representing him, the accused again knocked on SC’s door, seeking its intervention.“The deliberate creation of a hostile, terror-filled atmosphere within court precincts to prevent the filing of surety bonds constitutes constructive frustration and subversion of the regular bail order passed by SC. A criminal trial cannot be allowed to continue in a district where the local legal ecosystem, police machinery and local bar have combined to form a singular, hostile front against the accused, thereby creating reasonable apprehension of bias against a fair trial,” the petitioner said, pleading transfer of trial in the suicide case out of the state.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
Besides directing the jail authority to release him, the court sought a response from UP govt on compensation to be paid to the accused for his illegal detention and also directed that the case be brought to the notice of the CJ of Allahabad HC.“State is called upon to show cause as to why appropriate compensation should not be awarded to the petitioner for his illegal detention in custody so far, despite the fact that this court ordered release on bail one and a half months back,” the bench said.