The Allahabad High Court last week issued a show cause notice to the Special Judge of a CBI court for refusing to grant bail to an accused..The matter dates back to 2010, when an FIR was lodged against the applicant and other accused, who were later charged under s. 120B read with ss. 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant was granted bail in the matter, and the trial came to an end..At that point, the investigating agency submitted an application for the addition of Section 467 and 120B, which the trial court accepted. On this basis, the applicant was again taken into custody on April 13 of this year. Her bail application was allowed on April 20, on the condition that she deposited personal bonds of Rs. 1 lakh and two sureties of the same amount..Despite insisting that she be granted bail on the bonds that were furnished earlier, the court refused the same. As a result, the applicant had to spend close to a month in jail..What makes matters worse is that the Special Judge allowed another accused in the case to be enlarged on bail based on the bonds he had submitted earlier..The applicant then filed an application under s. 482 Cr.PC before the High Court. Appearing for the applicant, advocate Aseem Kumar Rai argued that there was no reason for the trial court to keep his client in custody on the pretext of verification of bail bonds. He further argued that his client should be compensated for illegal detention. Amit Mishra appeared for CBI..Taking note of this “bizarre incident”, the Bench of Justices Tarun Agarwala and Rajul Bhargava proceeded to issue a show cause notice to Special Judge Anil Kumar Jha. The order states,.“…We accordingly, issue notice to the Presiding Officer Sri Anil Kumar Jha, Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption, C.B.I., Court No. 2/ Additional Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad to file a reply in response to the application made against him to the Court and show cause why disciplinary proceeding should not be initiated against him and why compensation if awarded to the petitioner should not be recovered from his salary…”.The Court has also directed the District Judge, Ghaziabad to conduct an inquiry and submit a report in six weeks. The matter has been listed for July 18..Read order:
The Allahabad High Court last week issued a show cause notice to the Special Judge of a CBI court for refusing to grant bail to an accused..The matter dates back to 2010, when an FIR was lodged against the applicant and other accused, who were later charged under s. 120B read with ss. 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant was granted bail in the matter, and the trial came to an end..At that point, the investigating agency submitted an application for the addition of Section 467 and 120B, which the trial court accepted. On this basis, the applicant was again taken into custody on April 13 of this year. Her bail application was allowed on April 20, on the condition that she deposited personal bonds of Rs. 1 lakh and two sureties of the same amount..Despite insisting that she be granted bail on the bonds that were furnished earlier, the court refused the same. As a result, the applicant had to spend close to a month in jail..What makes matters worse is that the Special Judge allowed another accused in the case to be enlarged on bail based on the bonds he had submitted earlier..The applicant then filed an application under s. 482 Cr.PC before the High Court. Appearing for the applicant, advocate Aseem Kumar Rai argued that there was no reason for the trial court to keep his client in custody on the pretext of verification of bail bonds. He further argued that his client should be compensated for illegal detention. Amit Mishra appeared for CBI..Taking note of this “bizarre incident”, the Bench of Justices Tarun Agarwala and Rajul Bhargava proceeded to issue a show cause notice to Special Judge Anil Kumar Jha. The order states,.“…We accordingly, issue notice to the Presiding Officer Sri Anil Kumar Jha, Special Judge, Prevention of Corruption, C.B.I., Court No. 2/ Additional Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad to file a reply in response to the application made against him to the Court and show cause why disciplinary proceeding should not be initiated against him and why compensation if awarded to the petitioner should not be recovered from his salary…”.The Court has also directed the District Judge, Ghaziabad to conduct an inquiry and submit a report in six weeks. The matter has been listed for July 18..Read order:
