The Delhi High Court has initiated contempt proceedings against Dr. Pawan Kumar, Jail Superintendent of Central Jail-02, Tihar, after finding that the jail authorities failed to comply with an order directing the release of undertrial prisoner Anwar Hussain on parole.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, in an order dated September 15, 2026, held that the jail authority’s conduct amounted to a wilful violation of the Court’s earlier order. The Court also noted that Hussain had remained an undertrial prisoner for 5 years and 5 months.
Background of the Case
Hussain had approached the High Court after his parole application was rejected by the jail authority on February 17, 2026. He sought parole to pursue legal remedies before the Supreme Court following the dismissal of his criminal appeal.
On July 30, 2026, the High Court directed his release on parole for four weeks, subject to conditions to be imposed by the competent authority. However, those conditions were not imposed, and Hussain remained in custody.
The Court subsequently modified its earlier order on August 11 and itself prescribed specific conditions for his release. Despite this, the jail authority did not release Hussain, with the Superintendent reportedly stating that the order would not be acted upon unless it was received directly from the Court.
Court's Observation
The High Court noted that the August 11 order was a digitally signed public document whose authenticity could readily be verified. The Court rejected the explanation that the Superintendent needed to verify Hussain’s proposed residence because no such condition had been included in the Court’s order.
The Court observed:
"There is no mention, at all, in the order dated 11.08.2026 of a condition pertaining to the residence of the petitioner."
The Court further held that Hussain continued to remain behind bars despite a Constitutional Court order directing his release, observing that his rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution had been violated.
Decision
Finding Dr. Pawan Kumar’s conduct, including the imposition of additional conditions contrary to the August 11 order, to constitute a wilful violation, the High Court drew contempt proceedings against him.
Dr. Kumar accepted notice and was granted time to file his response explaining why he should not be punished under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The Court also directed him to remain personally present at the next hearing.
The matter has been listed for September 22, 2026.
