The Supreme Court in the case Gopishetty Harikrishna v. State of Andhra Pradesh SLP observed that the accused is in still in the custody, even after securing interim bail from the Apex Court and further the court observed that it was because of the misinterpretation of its order by a trial court judge in Andhra Pradesh. On 20th October, 2020., the bail application was drafted and on 29th October 2020 it was filled before the Trial Court and on misinterpreting the order passed by the Apex Court, The Trial Court refused to grant bail and even after the Supreme Court granted him bail the accused was not release further It was asserted that in view of the COVID-19 restrictions prevalent at that point in time, the accused could not be immediately moved. The Registry of the Court had explained the delay stating that the order was transmitted through electronic medium immediately, but the physical copy was sent in due course the order dated 28th September 2020 the granting of bail was received in the prison on 6th October 2020., Central Prison Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, submitted before the court in its response of the Superintendent. the Supreme Court had recorded in its order that till then the accused was not released on bail as on 20th April 2022 the matter came up before the Supreme Court and on 25th April 2022, it sought explanation from the concerned police and jail officials as After granting bail on 28th September, 2020. the application was not maintainable as three days’ time period set-out by the Apex Court had expired and the court refused to enlarge him on bail as the bail application came up before the Trial Court on 29th September 2020. Further the court directed the Trial Court to release him on interim bail on such terms and conditions as it deems appropriate. the Apex Court had granted interim bail to the accused and directed that he be p r o du c e d b e f o r e t h e Trial Court within three days from that date of order i.e., on 28th September 2020. the order passed by the High Court states after expiry of time as per orders of Supreme Court, how the petition in maintainable and hence it is to be returned. The four-judge bench comprising Justice U.U. Lalit, justice S. Ravindra Bhat, justice P.S. Narasimha and the justice Sudhanshu observed in the present case of Hussainara Khatoon and Motil Ram, where custody for 9 years was found to be sufficient to enlarge him on bail.
