'Illegal Detention': Allu Arjun’s Lawyers Question Delay In Jail Release, Mull Legal Action

Tollywood superstar Allu Arjun was released from Chanchalguda Jail on Saturday morning, but his legal team has accused jail authorities of “illegal detention” for delaying his release despite a High Court order. Arjun’s lawyer, Ashok Reddy, told the media that the Telangana High Court had explicitly instructed jail authorities to release the actor immediately after receiving the bail order. “The High Court order clearly stated that the actor should be released forthwith. Despite receiving the order copy, they did not release him,” he said.

Lawyers Question Delay

Reddy emphasized that there was no delay in submitting the High Court order. A certified copy of the order was given to the jail authorities, and a messenger from the High Court also delivered a copy. Despite this, Arjun was only released at 6:40 AM, several hours after the order was issued.  “You should question the government and department why the actor was not released. They have to answer,” Reddy said. “We will take all legally permissible steps to address this issue.”

]The actor, who had been in Chanchalguda Jail since Friday, was granted interim bail by the Telangana High Court late in the evening. The bail order came an hour after a lower court had sent him to 14 days of judicial custody in connection with a stampede during the premiere of his film Pushpa 2: The Rule.

The incident, which took place at Sandhya Theatre on December 4, resulted in the death of a woman and critical injuries to her son. Police had registered a case under sections 105 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder), 118(1) (voluntarily causing hurt), and 3(5) BNS against Arjun, his security team, and the theatre management.

Following his release, Allu Arjun drove to Geetha Arts, the family’s film production house, where he reportedly held discussions with his lawyers for about an hour. The actor’s legal team has stated that they are planning further legal action over what they claim was a violation of the High Court’s explicit orders.