Disregard shown by senior most officials to orders passed by Court has grave consequences on rule of law: Allahabad High Court

11th June,2021

Disregard shown by senior most officials to orders passed by Court has grave consequences on rule of law: Allahabad High Court


The Allahabad High Court on Thursday chastised Uttar Pradesh police for failing to deliver timely bail application instructions to government counsel (Sanjay @ Mausam v. State of UP). "It may be underlined that contempt demonstrated by the senior most authorities to the judgments made by the Court has grave ramifications on the rule of law in the country," Justice Ajay Bhanot wrote in the decision for a single judge bench. The Court was hearing one such bail application in which the police had failed to convey instructions to the State's Assistant Government Advocate (AGA). Justice Bhanot slammed these authorities, claiming that such delays frequently result in an accused's unwarranted detention. As this Court has often remarked, the police authorities fail to issue instructions to the learned Government Advocate of bail applications on a regular basis. When the police authorities are notified that they have failed to issue instructions on time, it strikes at the heart of the law. In another case, police personnel failed to implement the Court's directives, despite the AGA's assertion that the State government is dedicated to upholding the rule of law. The process of providing instructions to the GA/AGA before hearing bail petitions must include protections that preserve the constitutional liberties of bail applicants/accused people, the Court stated in its order. To accomplish the aforementioned, the procedure must be transparent, with clearly defined roles and timetables. Failure to follow the processes and dates mentioned therein should be held accountable by the responsible officials." Advocate Santosh Kumar Shukla, who represents the bail application, claims that his client has been falsely accused in the current case. He went on to say that the FIR was filed seven days after the incident, that the petitioner was not mentioned in the FIR, and that no independent witnesses have been called in the case. On the other hand, because he did not have any orders from the police authority, the AGA for the State was unable to satisfactorily challenge the aforementioned submissions from the record. This compelled the Court to consider the failure of police authorities to offer timely instructions to government lawyers very seriously.