Days After Criticising Govt Counsels Over Substandard Affidavits, Allahabad HC Judge Recuses From Hearing SHUATS Director's Bail Plea
Justice Manju Rani Chauhan last week recused herself from hearing a bail application filed by Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology And Sciences (SHUATS) director Vinod Bihari Lal in a case lodged against him for allegedly causing grievous hurt to a person. This development comes days after the Single Judge expressed her dissatisfaction with the quality/adequacy of...
Justice Manju Rani Chauhan last week recused herself from hearing a bail application filed by Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Technology And Sciences (SHUATS) director Vinod Bihari Lal in a case lodged against him for allegedly causing grievous hurt to a person.
This development comes days after the Single Judge expressed her dissatisfaction with the quality/adequacy of the counter-affidavits filed by the State Government counsels in various pending matters.
It may be noted that the Court, on February 19, pulled up the state counsels for their inability to file 'up to the mark' counter-affidavits. The Court had also directed the concerned official authorities of the state to develop a mechanism to ensure the drafting of effective, coherent and comprehensive counter-affidavits.
Read more details about the Court's order here: Allahabad HC Pulls Up State Counsels For Filing Substandard Counter Affidavits, Directs Framing Of Effective Practice For Drafting Replies
The stringent observations were made by the single judge during the hearing of SHUATS Director Lal's bail plea after the Additional Advocate General P.K. Giri opposed Lal's bail plea. The Court noted that though AGA placed reliance on the statement of the doctor of the Government Hospital, he, however, could not fortify it based on any material as no such document had been appended along with the counter affidavit in the matter drafted by AGA Sunil Kumar.
Perusing the record, this Court had also noted that the counter affidavit filed by the State contained no rational reply to the averments made in the bail application and that it was bereft of relevant documents.
Noting that the counter affidavit seems to have been drafted heedlessly and in a very casual manner, the Court took exception to the incompetence of the State Counsels to extend their ability in drafting the counter affidavits up to the standards they are expected for.
Consequently, the Court granted a week to the Additional Advocate General to file a better counter affidavit annexing all the necessary documents including the statement of the doctor.
However, when the matter came up for hearing on Friday, March 1, though the Court took the State's reply on record, the single judge, decided to recuse herself from hearing the case and directed that the matter be posted before another bench after obtaining nomination on 11th March as fresh.
Case title - Vinod Bihari Lal vs, State of U.P.