The Supreme Court has strongly criticised the Uttar Pradesh government for illegally detaining a prisoner for 28 days despite the bail order being in effect. The court ordered the state to pay ₹5 lakh as interim compensation, saying that “liberty cannot be denied on the basis of frivolous technicalities and irrelevant errors.”
Read also: "Black Cat Commando Must Surrender: Supreme Court Denies Exemption in Dowry Death Case"
A bench of Justices KV Vishwanathan and NK Singh said the prisoner, arrested under Section 366 of IPC and Section 3/5(i) of the UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, was kept behind bars due to clerical lapse in the bail order. The bail order mentioned only "Section 5" instead of the full "Section 5(i)", which was cited by the jail authorities as the reason for non-release.
"When there is no difficulty in identifying the prisoner and the offences, it is a grave dereliction of duty to not heed the orders of the court and keep the person behind bars," the bench said.
Read also: Supreme Court Summons UP Jailor for Ignoring Bail Order, Calls It 'Travesty of Justice'
Despite a clear release order dated May 27, 2025, the prisoner was released only on June 24 following the court's intervention. The Ghaziabad jail superintendent had to appear before the court physically, while the UP DIG (Prisons) attended virtually.
During the hearing, Justice Vishwanathan asked, “Is the absence of a subsection a valid reason to keep someone in jail? What message are we sending by such actions?”
The court did not agree with the argument of UP Additional Advocate General Garima Prasad that the release process could not take place due to the absence of a subsection. The bench warned that if such an approach to personal liberty continued, the compensation could be increased to ₹10 lakh.
Read also: PIL filed in Supreme Court Seeking Grounding of Air India's Boeing Fleet After Ahmedabad Plane Crash
The bench remarked, “Every stakeholder knew the crime and the sections involved in it. Despite this, the accused remained in custody, which is ridiculous.”
Though the DIG (Prisons) informed the court about the ongoing departmental inquiry, the Supreme Court ordered a judicial inquiry. The Principal District Judge of Ghaziabad has been tasked to investigate the delay and determine whether negligence or any other serious misconduct led to prolonged detention.
The court declared, “The only way to remedy this situation is by awarding ad hoc monetary compensation.” The compensation is provisional; final accountability and possible recovery from the erring officials will be determined after an investigation.
The court emphasised that liberty is a “very valuable and precious right” and should never be compromised due to administrative or clerical lapses.
The court concluded that “we hope that no other convict or undertrial prisoner suffers in jail due to such technicalities,” while recording the assurance given by the DIG that corrective measures will be taken.
Case Title: AFTAB Versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH, MA 1086/2025 in Crl.A. No. 2295/2025
