North India Statesman
[ad_1]
Jabalpur, 28 August (HS). This is probably the first case of its kind in Madhya Pradesh High Court, when a habeas corpus petition has been filed after not getting bail. Because before this, perhaps in any court, a habeas corpus petition was filed instead of an appeal after bail was rejected and or a hearing was held on it.
An important legal case was heard in the High Court Chief Justice's double bench in Jabalpur. A habeas corpus petition has been filed in the court, in which the petitioner's advocate has alleged illegal detention of his client after the bail petition was rejected.
Usually, when bail is rejected, an appeal is filed in a higher court, but in this case, the petitioner's lawyer has filed a habeas corpus petition in a different way. The lawyer argues that his client's bail petition was rejected on wrong facts and grounds, as a result of which his client is being kept in jail illegally. In this case, the court asked the petitioner's lawyer whether he has filed an appeal against the previous decision or has this matter gone to the Supreme Court? Advocate Amitabh Gupta told the court that the petitioner's father, who supports him, is in jail. Therefore, he is not in a position to go to the Supreme Court and this case is related to thousands of such people who are waiting for bail in the courts. Therefore, he has filed this habeas corpus petition.
◆ This is the whole matter-
Suvidha Land Developers India Private Limited was accused of cheating people by luring them with investment. After which in the year 2021, a total of 6 people including Jibrakhan Sahu were arrested by the police. All these 6 people were said to be the directors of Suvidha Land Developer Company, while Jibrakhan Sahu was only a promoter in that company. That is why Jibrakhan Sahu's daughter has filed this petition.
Petitioner's advocate Amitabh Gupta has talked about violation of fundamental rights in his petition and in this regard cited such previous orders of the Supreme Court in which relief has been given to the victims of illegal imprisonment. He argued that in this case, the constitutional rights of his client have been violated, which requires immediate judicial review. On behalf of the petitioner, the advocate put forward the fact that in this case, while the police itself is presenting the document that the accused Jirbarkhan Sahu is the promoter, in the charge sheet of the police he is being described as the director. At the same time, the documents received from SEBI also confirm that Jirbarkhan is not the director of the company. In the complaint made to the magistrate in this case, Jirbarkhan Lal Sahu is also the complainant, but even after that the police made him the accused. The advocate alleged that all these facts were presented before the court even at the time of hearing of the bail petition, but the court ignored them and granted bail. After this, a petition has been filed to declare the accused being kept in jail as illegal.
After the hearing, the division bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Vinay Saraf has issued notice to the respondents and sought their response in this matter. The next hearing on this petition will be on September 23.
