Minor error makes UP man spend 8 extra months in jail

Gallery

MORE...

Sports

Freya Deshmane wins gold in first Winter Horse Show organised by Amateur Riders’ Club

Freya Deshmane riding on Reinroe Adare Acrobat claimed the top spot and clinched the gold

Salah sets Premier League record in Liverpool's draw at Newcastle

India Open Competition in Shotgun begins in Jaipur, paving way for Nationals' qualification

Hockey India names Amir Ali-led 20-man team for Junior Asia Cup

Harmanpreet Singh named FIH Player of the Year, PR Sreejesh gets best goalkeeper award

World Boxing medallist Gaurav Bidhuri to flag off 'Delhi Against Drugs' movement on Nov 17

MORE...

Minor error makes UP man spend 8 extra months in jail

Last Updated : 21 Dec 2020 10:01:57 AM IST

Inmate (file photo)

A minor error made an Uttar Pradesh man spend eight more months in prison even after he was granted bail by a court.

The mistake was that his middle name 'Kumar' had not been mentioned in the bail order.

The applicant's name in the remand sheet was Vinod Kumar Baruaar, while the court order mentioned his name as Vinod Baruaar.

The jail superintendent kept a man in illegal confinement for eight months only because of this error.

Vinod had filed a bail application before the high court and on April 9, the court directed his release on bail.

But he was not released as the jail authorities refused to comply with the release order passed in this case because of the discrepancy in the name.

The court came to know about his confinement when he moved an application for name correction.

While hearing the application, the court took serious note of his confinement due to small technicality and directed the release of the applicant.

The court then summoned the jail superintendent of Siddhartha Nagar district jail and observed: "It is on small technicality that the jail superintendent 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 will appear before it and explain why appropriate departmental inquiry may not be recommended against him.

Jail superintendent, Rakesh Singh, appeared before the court and filed an affidavit stating the applicant had been released from the prison on December 8.

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."