The Allahabad High Court directed the Uttar Pradesh Government to pay Rs 50,000 to Furkan after police gave incorrect criminal record details opposing bail, which Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal later granted on merits in a car theft case.
PRAYAGRAJ: The Allahabad High Court has directed the Uttar Pradesh government to pay Rs 50,000 to an accused after police provided incorrect details about his criminal record while opposing his bail application.
Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal heard the bail plea of Furkan, who was arrested in November last year in connection with the theft of a Santro car. On March 10, the court granted him bail on the merits of the case.
Furkan’s counsel also urged the court to take action against the police, stating that he could have secured bail on February 23 but remained in custody for another 15 days because the police erroneously reported that he had 12 previous cases instead of five.
The court found that the Investigation Officer (IO) had supplied the wrong information, noting that the accused had already clarified that his record showed five cases.
The court observed,
“Therefore, compensation of Rs 50,000 shall be paid by the State to the applicant within a period of one month from today. From the perusal of record, it is also clear that there was no malafide on the part of the I.O. but there was mistake because of his negligence that may be due to workload on him,”
ALSO READ: “Jailing Is Just Optics”: Supreme Court Slams Colonial-Era Investigation Methods in India
After the accused disputed the police’s account of his criminal history, the court summoned the Additional Director General (Technical Services) of Lucknow. ADG Naveen Arora appeared via video conference on March 10 and admitted the IO’s error.
Arora pointed out that an accused’s criminal history can be easily checked using the Crime and Criminal Tracking Network and Systems (CCTNS). He added that access to retrieve the case diary through the Inter-Operable Criminal Justice System (ICJS) had been provided to the Joint Director of Prosecution at the Allahabad High Court, but that officer had not used the facility due to staff shortages.
The court ordered the Director Prosecution to ensure adequate staffing in the Joint Director of Prosecution’s office so that the ICJS facility can be utilized and delays in obtaining instructions avoided.
Advocates Shravan Kumar Singh and Umesh Kumar Patel represented the accused, while Additional Government Advocate Pankaj Saxena appeared for the State.
Case Title: Furkan v State of UP
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE