“We’re shocked on the conduct of the state authorities,” mentioned the bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra and directed the director basic, prisons, to conduct a “private inquiry into the matter and repair duty and take motion towards the individuals involved”.The accused, Shashi Jurmani, in custody for greater than 4 years, petitioned SC for bail in a legal try and homicide case registered at Ulhasnagar in 2021. The apex courtroom granted Jurmani bail topic to situations to be imposed by the trial courtroom. Jurmani’s counsel submitted that he was not even produced earlier than a courtroom on 55 dates out of 85.The SC bench heard state counsel Raman Yadav’s response and famous that the submission of the petitioner’s counsel, Sana Raees Khan, relating to the undertrial inmate’s non-production in courtroom had “not been controverted”.The preliminary allegation towards the petitioner within the FIR was that he, together with others, stabbed a person in addition to a police constable.Nonetheless, later, the person, who died after two months, “clearly” mentioned in his assertion that the petitioner solely assaulted him with fists and kicks and it was one other accused who had stabbed the policeman with a knife.The police constable, in his assertion, didn’t title any accused and solely described bodily construct, famous the SC order.The petitioner claimed that he had no legal antecedents and a co-accused had been granted bail.“We’re shocked on the conduct of the state authorities. The manufacturing of an accused earlier than the courtroom shouldn’t be solely to make sure a speedy trial however extra importantly, as a safeguard in order that the prisoner shouldn’t be abused in any other case, and he comes immediately involved with the courtroom to air his grievances, if any, towards the authorities. We discover that there was a grave infraction of such elementary safeguard, which is interesting and surprising. We deprecate the identical,” mentioned Supreme Courtroom.“If any try is made to guard or protect any individual”, SC mentioned the DG prisons or the pinnacle of division to whom it was entrusting the inquiry “shall be personally held accountable”.The courtroom sought a report with an affidavit personally affirmed by the officer in two months, when the matter would subsequent be heard.
