Delhi High Court: Trial Courts Not to Insist the Bail Applicant for Filing Attested Documents During the Lockdown

Must Read

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi,...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions,...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by...

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour...

Follow us

In Hansraj and Others vs State of Delhi and Others, Hansraj filed a petition in the High Court. The petition requested the granting of bail. A Single-judge bench of Justice Asha Menon heard the matter.

Brief Facts

A 23-year old in judicial custody filed the petition. He approached the High Court after the centre rejected his bail application. It rejected because it was not attested by the accused himself or any of his family members. The District Courts needed the petitioner to attest the vakalatnama himself. If the petitioner is in judicial custody, the family member of the petitioner has to sign. The petitioner here is in Judicial custody, and his family resides in Ghaziabad. While the Counsel appearing resides in Gurugram. Due to the lockdown, the Counsel could not get the documents attested.

Arguments before the Court

The Counsel for the petitioner submitted an undertaking in the Court. It guaranteed the submission of the attested documents after the lockdown. The petitioner’s father also sent an email as an authorization letter. The Counsel for respondents also supported this argument. He asked the District Courts to follow the directions of the Delhi High Court. He submitted that these guidelines would help lawyers and litigants during the pandemic.

Observation of the Court

The Court asked the centre to show greater sensitivity during the lockdown. The High Court observed the misplaced concern of unauthorized filing of bail applications. A person who is in jail moves the bail application for his benefit. If the Court rejects the bail application, it will not bar the filing of a fresh bail application. The Court will have to dispose of the application again as per law.

Considering the exceptional circumstances during the lockdown, the Court eased the restrictions.

Directions of the Court

  1. It ordered the filing of the vakalatnama and bail application after the lockdown. The Court also removed the mandatory rule of filing the vakalatnama.
  2. The Courts also accepted email affirming the appointment of the Counsel. The email should contain the Aadhar and mobile number of that person. It removed the need for signatures for the appointment.
  3. District Courts to not rely on signatures for bail applications. When the applicant is in jail, and the family resides outside Delhi.
  4. District Courts cannot reject bail applications due to a lack of signatures.

Court’s Decision

The High Court directed the Facilitation Centre to accept the bail application. It directed the advocate to file an undertaking to submit the attested documents after lockdown. The High Court ordered the listing of the application without further delay.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention order of the husband of...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

Punjab Woman Evokes Petition for Protection Fearing Honour Killing

In the case of Divya Mattu and another vs State of Punjab and others, the petitioner, Divya, fearing honour killing against her by her...

Punjab Woman Accuses Punjab Police of Keeping Husband in Illegal Custody and Framing Him in a False Case

In the case of Geeta v the State of Punjab, the petitioner evoked a writ petition of habeas corpus as she claimed that her...

Addition of Words as Prefixes or Suffixes Is an Infringement of a Registered Trademark: Delhi High Court

Justice Jayanth Nath allowed the Times Group to use its registered trademark “Newshour”, in the case of Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd v. ARG Outlier...

Just Because the Deceased Did Not Have License, Does Not Imply He Was Negligent: Chhattisgarh High Court

In the case of Hemlal & Others v. Dayaram & Others, a Single Bench of Chhattisgarh High Court consisting of Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal annunciated various...

Hoardings Are Movable Property Under Section 2(3) of DMC Act Subject To the Twin Test: Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court in the case of Delhi International Airport v South Delhi Metropolitan Corporation discussed in detail the provision under Section 2(3) of the DMC...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -