Image Courtesy:ndtv.com
Expressing its dissatisfaction towards the State of Uttar Pradesh’s response time, the Supreme Court on May 6, 2022, made strong remarks on the state government’s track record of not taking timely actions on issues until a contempt plea is filed against them.
Supreme Court bench comprising CJI NV Ramana and Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli was hearing the case of State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Rahul Yadav, where the state filed a plea against an order of the Allahabad HC summoning eight officers of the State government in connection with a missing patient who may have been detained.
Brief background of the case
A habeas corpus petition was filed by an 82-year-old covid patient’s son before the Allahabad High Court seeking his father’s release from the hospital’s custody who allegedly went missing last year from a hospital in Uttar Pradesh. The State of UP and the 8 state officers who filed the present special leave petition had been directed by the High Court to produce the 82-year-old before the Court failing which they were ordered to remain personally present before the Court.
The Court issued notice and stayed the proceedings before the High Court. The court directed the State to pay an amount of Rs. 50,000 to the respondents as an initial amount to cover the litigation expenses and enable them to appear before the Supreme Court, as per LiveLaw.
Court’s scathing observations
LiveLaw reported that while addressing the Additional Advocate General (AAG) Garima Parshad appearing for the State of UP, the CJI said, “You don’t comply with directions, at the last minute when contempt is sought you come. It is the habit of your State!”
When the AAG submitted that two SITs had been formed to probe the issue and to check whether there was illegal detention of the missing patient, Justice Kohli observed that the person has been missing for a year now. She reportedly remarked, “How can he be missing? His oxygen was 82, he was unable to walk! He was in the hospital. Where will the body go?”
Adding to this Justice Murari asked whether the State checked if the patient’s body was somewhere. Justice Hima Kohli reportedly said, “It has been one year he’s been missing. Imagine the family’s desperation. Look at the agony of family.”
The AAG submitted that there was no conclusive evidence available to conclude if the person is alive and further submitted that the state had taken all possible steps. The AAG justified that all cremation centres in Prayagraj had been checked and that as per the person’s last medical exam the alleged missing person’s parameters were also normal. To this, Justice Murari reportedly exclaimed, “That means he vanished into thin air right!”
The court reportedly disapproved of the State’s lack of action and remarked that the Petitioners wouldn’t have to come all the way to the Supreme Court had the State done its job properly.
Related:
SC slams State, issues notice for protection of witnesses in Ashish Mishra case
EXCLUSIVE: Hundreds die of Covid and data goes missing, UP gov’t remorseless
Death of Covid patients due to oxygen shortage is not less than genocide: Allahabad HC