In a scathing order, the Supreme Court chastised the Allahabad High Court for passing “cyclostyled template orders” for last two years in at least 40 pleas for cancellation of bail by asking complainants to seek remedy under the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018.“We have come across a catena of orders from the Allahabad High Court proceeding on an incorrect assumption of the law, more particularly that the Witness Protection Scheme is a substitute for cancellation of bail. According to the High Court it is an alternative remedy,” a bench comprising Justices J B Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta said.
The bench went on, “We are at pains to note that we came across at least 40 recent orders, that have been passed in the last one year alone, as per the records available from the official website of the Allahabad High Court.”
Interestingly, it was Justice Pardiwala-led which criticised Allahabad High Court judge Prashant Kumar for allowing criminal proceedings in a civil dispute case, and stripped him of criminal matters till retirement.
This contentious order was later modified apparently at the behest of Chief Justice B R Gavai.
In the case at hand, Justice Pardiwala passed a strongly-worded judgment and set aside an order of the High Court that refused to cancel the bail of an accused facing trial for a murder, and instead relegated the complainant to seek recourse under the Witness Protection Scheme.