Bombay HC| Sameera Siddiqui | Social Thikana
The High Court reprimanded the trial court for refusing to release the applicant on bail despite express directions for the High Court and called for a report explaining its stand.
Trial court has no authority to question an order passed by the High Court, the Bombay High Court recently observed pulling up a trial court in Maharashtra for refusing to release the applicant on bail despite express directions to that effect by the High Court.
The applicant, Gulfasha Shaikh, had been granted bail by Justice Sarang Kotwal of Bombay High Court on June 18, 2021 after the Court noted that she had been in custody since November 2020 with her 10-month-old child. Despite this order, Justice Kotwal was approached by advocate Aniket Vagal for the applicant on June 28, 2021 seeking urgent hearing after the trial court refused to accept cash bail and was not releasing the applicant. He submitted that the trial court refused to release the applicant as the High Court failed to record Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code which was one of the charges against the applicant in its order.
Terming it a "serious breach of order", Justice Kotwal emphasised that the trial court was expected to follow the clear directions issued in the operative part of his order.
He also clarified that if there had been any ambiguity in the order, it was either for the parties or the prosecution to point it out. The order could have also been corrected by a higher forum. But the trial court had no authority to question that order. In any case, the operative part of the order is very clear and there was absolutely no ambiguity. Only to avoid creating any further hurdles, the High Court clarified its order by adding Section 302 in its previous order.
The Court also asked the trial court to explain its stand through a report to be furnished to the Court within 10 days.