Illiterate Bail Applicant Fails To Sign Vakalatnama: MP High Court Directs Co-Prisoner To Teach Him To Write His Name

Update: 2021-08-08 14:13 GMT
trueasdfstory

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently deferred hearing on a bail application after noting that the bail applicant had, instead of putting his signature in the Vakalatnama put a thumb impression. Noting that it was very unfortunate that a youth of 22 years is completely illiterate and even he cannot write his name, the Bench of Justice Vivek Rusia deferred the hearing on the...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently deferred hearing on a bail application after noting that the bail applicant had, instead of putting his signature in the Vakalatnama put a thumb impression.

Noting that it was very unfortunate that a youth of 22 years is completely illiterate and even he cannot write his name, the Bench of Justice Vivek Rusia deferred the hearing on the bail application.

Interestingly, the Court ordered the Assistant Jail Superintendent, Subjail, Bagli to provide him basic education so that he can write his name and can sign the Vakalatnama.

The Court directed the Assistant Jail Superintendent to provide him a co-prisoner, who can teach him so that he could write at least his name.

The Order of the Court in this regard read thus:

"It is very unfortunate that a youth of 22 years is completely illiterate and even he cannot write his name, hence hearing of this bail application is deferred. Let basic education be given to the applicant so that he can write his name and can sign the Vakalatnama. The Assistant Jail Superintendent, Subjail, Bagli is directed to provide a co-prisoner, who can teach him so that he could write at least his name."

With these observations, the Court had listed the matter for further hearing on August 2.

The Bail applicant allegedly committed theft in the shop of the complainant and had stolen a mobile phone. Accordingly, the case had been registered against the applicant.

Further, on August 2, 2021, the Court heard the parties and granted him bail after taking into account the fact that he had been in jail since 20/04/2021, investigation was complete and charge sheet had been filed and that he was not required for custodial investigation.

Case title - Suresh Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order

Tags:    

Similar News