Bail | Right to Speedy Trial is a Fundamental Right Under Article 21: PH High Court    |     Postal Department’s Power to Enhance Penalties Time-Barred, Rules Allahabad High Court    |     Tenants Cannot Cross-Examine Landlords Unless Relationship is Disputed: Madras High Court    |     NDPS | Conscious Possession Extends to Vehicle Drivers: Telangana High Court Upholds 10-Year Sentence in Ganja Trafficking Case    |     Aid Reduction Of Without Due Process Unlawful: Rajasthan High Court Restores Full Grants for Educational Institutions    |     Assessment of Notional Income in Absence of Proof Cannot Be 'Mathematically Precise,' Says Patna High Court    |     NCLT's Resolution Plan Overrides State Tax Claims: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Demands Against Patanjali Foods    |     An Agreement is Not Voidable if the Party Could Discover the Truth with Ordinary Diligence: Calcutta High Court Quashes Termination of LPG Distributorship License    |     Independent Witnesses Contradict Prosecution's Story: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquit Accused in Arson Case    |     Merely Being a Joint Account Holder Does Not Attract Liability Under Section 138 of NI Act:  Gujarat High Court    |     Higher Court Cannot Reappreciate Evidence Unless Perversity is Found: Himachal Pradesh High Court Refused to Enhance Maintenance    |     Perpetual Lease Allows Division of Property: Delhi High Court Affirms Partition and Validity of Purdah Wall    |     "Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Videography in Temple Premises Limited to Religious Functions: Kerala High Court Orders to Restrict Non-Religious Activities on Temple Premises    |     Past Service Must Be Counted for Pension Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Affirms Pension Rights for Daily Wage Employees    |     'Beyond Reasonable Doubt’ Does Not Mean Beyond All Doubt: Madras High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Man Convicted of Murdering Mother-in-Law    |    

High Court of Allahabad Criticizes Systemic Failures in Legal Representation for Marginalized Sections

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Allahabad, presided over by Hon'ble Justice Ajay Bhanot, has denied the bail application of Titu, who has been incarcerated since August 2017. The court highlighted the applicant's prolonged absence before the trial court and the systemic failures in providing legal aid to marginalized sections of society.

Titu, the applicant, was nominated in a criminal case in 2005 but was not arrested until August 10, 2017. He belongs to a marginalized section of society and did not have the resources or legal aid to apply for bail earlier. This is his first bail application.

The court noted the applicant's failure to appear before the trial court for over a decade. Despite his arrest in 2017, no satisfactory explanation was provided for this extended absence. The bail application itself was poorly drafted, indicating inadequate legal assistance.

Justice Bhanot emphasized the systemic failures in providing legal aid to marginalized individuals. He remarked, "Prima facie, it is evident that the applicant has been without legal aid since his arrest and even at this stage, the drafting has been less than satisfactory. No assistance is forthcoming from the applicant's counsel."

To address these deficiencies, the court appointed Shri Rajiv Lochan Shukla as amicus curiae and directed the High Court Legal Services Committee to assist in filing an affidavit on behalf of the applicant. The learned District Judge of Meerut was instructed to provide all relevant details to the amicus curiae promptly.

Justice Bhanot stated, "Considering the urgency of the matter, the learned District Judge, Meerut shall ensure that all relevant details are provided to Shri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned amicus curiae promptly."

The denial of Titu's bail application underscores the ongoing challenges faced by marginalized individuals in accessing timely and adequate legal aid. The court's appointment of an amicus curiae reflects its commitment to ensuring justice is served, despite systemic shortcomings. This case highlights the need for systemic reforms to provide better legal support for marginalized sections of society.

 

Date of Decision: July 15, 2024

Titu VS State of U.P

 

Similar News