Read Time: 05 minutes
The high court in its order noted that the order had been passed in utter disregard to the order passed by High Court. The man did not have the liberty to approach the session court for bail and was granted the liberty to approach the high court itself for bail. Despite this, the sessions court granted bail to the man.
A single-judge bench of the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad comprising Justice RM Joshi recently reprimanded a sessions judge of Osmanabad for not following the high court order granting bail to a murder accused.
“To ensure maintenance of faith in judicial system by the public at large, the Courts need to be transparent and disciplined in the matter of dispensation of justice. The trial Courts are expected to maintain judicial propriety and ensure that there is no insubordination of Higher Court in any manner,” the high court observed.
The high court was hearing a plea filed by a man who was denied bail by the high court itself, but he was granted liberty to approach the high court again if the trial did not conclude within eight months.
However, instead of approaching the high court as per the earlier order, the man filed an application before the sessions court, and the additional sessions judge granted him bail.
The high court expressed its dissatisfaction, noting that the session judge's decision had been made in complete disregard of the high court's previous order.
“The prosecutor also does not seem to have discharged his duties towards the Court. The order has been passed in utter disregard to the order passed by High Court. It is settled law that an order obtained by fraud is non est in eyes of law. Hence, this is a fit case to exercise suo moto inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C to prevent abuse of the process of Court,” the court noted.
The high court also commended another session judge who acted diligently and did not accept the surety for bail despite the bail order being passed.
“Before parting it needs to be noted that learned District and Sessions Judge, Osmanabad was alert and vigilant to the occurrences around and most importantly did not turn blind eye towards them. She instead of giving undue importance to procedure rightly prioritized prevention of abuse of process of law over technicalities. This act deserves appreciation, as without such positive step, the order in question would certainly have gone unnoticed,” the court noted.
The high court subsequently set aside the order of the sessions court and directed it to be submitted to the Principal Secretary, Law and Judiciary, for appropriate action within its jurisdiction.
Case title: Ramchandra Maruti Yedage vs State of Maharashtra
Please Login or Register
