Missing ‘sub-section' prompts U.P. to delay release of man who got bail, SC orders State to pay him ₹5 lakh compensation

The Hindu

5 hours ago

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (June 25, 2025) directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to pay ₹5 lakh in interim compensation to a man who remained in jail for 28 days despite the Court's order granting him bail in an abduction and unlawful religious conversion case.
The man, identified as Aftab, was granted bail by the apex court, followed by a release order by the trial court. However, State authorities delayed his release, citing that the court orders did not explicitly mention that he had been charged under Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.
A Bench of Justices K.V. Viswanathan and N. Kotiswar Singh termed the State's justification both 'preposterous' and 'unfortunate'.
'The whole episode is unfortunate. Each one of the stakeholders in the process was aware as to what the man's offence was, what the crime number of the case was, what the Section under which he was charged with and what was the punishing Section. Despite this, he was sent on a spin,' Justice Viswanathan observed.
While Aftab was supposed to be released on May 27, he was finally freed only on the night of June 24.
'Liberty is a very valuable and precious right guaranteed to persons under the Constitution. It cannot be bartered on these useless technicalities. We only hope no other convicts or undertrials languishing in jails are victims of similar technicalities,' Justice Viswanathan said.
Addressing Director General of Prisons P.C. Meena and the Superintendent of Ghaziabad Jail, where Aftab was lodged, Justice Viswanathan remarked, 'Is this what you tell your officers? To look for Sub-sections and to see whether they have been mentioned or not? What is going on in this State… a vast State with many jails… God knows how many people are languishing in your jails despite valid judicial orders for their release on bail.'
Mr. Meena assured the Bench that he would personally sensitise prison officials on the matter.
The Court observed that jail authorities must not 'nit-pick' valid judicial orders to delay the release of undertrials and convicts. 'As long as basic particulars are available [in bail and release orders of courts], and there is no dispute identifying the individual, nit-picking on court orders and on that pretext not implementing them and keeping individuals behind bars would be a serious dereliction of duty to start with,' Justice Viswanathan said.
'The jail department must focus on the substance of the order and not look out for irrelevant and minute errors to use them as a pretext to deny liberty,' he added.
The Bench directed the Principal District and Sessions Judge of Ghaziabad to conduct an inquiry to determine whether the absence of the specific Sub-section was indeed the reason for the delay, or whether there was 'something sinister.'
'The enquiry would focus on the reason behind the delay in release [of Aftab]. Why was he detained beyond May 27? Is the missing Sub-section the real reason or was there something sinister? The judge must independently look into whether there was any gross negligence by prison authorities, and fix responsibility on the officer/officers in case of any negligence,' the court said.
The enquiry report is to be submitted to the apex court. Meanwhile, the Bench directed the State to pay ₹5 lakh in 'ad hoc, provisional compensation' to Aftab and report compliance by July 27.
'The net result of this non-issue is that the applicant [Aftab] lost his liberty for at least 28 full days. The only way to remedy the situation is to order ad hoc monetary compensation which would be provisional in nature,' the Bench said.
It added that final compensation would be determined based on the outcome of the District Judge's enquiry and that the Court would also consider recovering the amount or part thereof from the officers found responsible.
The matter is scheduled to be heard next on August 18.