In a sharp and serious move, the Supreme Court of India has summoned the Superintendent Jailor of Ghaziabad District Jail for not releasing a prisoner despite a clear bail order passed by the apex court.
A bench of Justices KV Vishwanathan and N Kotiswar Singh expressed strong disapproval over the incident and scheduled the matter as the first item for hearing the next day. The Court also directed the Director General (Prisons), Uttar Pradesh to appear virtually and clarify the situation.
Read also: Supreme Court Stays Arrest of Wajahat Khan in Multiple FIRs Against Him over Alleged Hate Speech
While pronouncing the order, the Bench said, "This case presents a very unfortunate scenario. The petitioner/applicant was released on bail by the order of this Court dated 29.04.2025."
The accused was granted bail in a case registered on 03.01.2024 at Ghaziabad in Uttar Pradesh, involving charges under Section 366 of IPC and Section 3/5 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The apex court had ordered his release during the pendency of the trial, subject to the conditions prescribed by the trial court.
Subsequently, the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 13, Ghaziabad issued a formal release order addressed to the jail authorities. It directed them to release the accused after furnishing the required personal bond, provided he is not involved in any other case.
However, the petitioner later again approached the Supreme Court and claimed that he was still in custody. The reason? The jail authorities allegedly refused to release him as clause (1) of Section 5 of the 2021 Act was not specifically mentioned in the Supreme Court's bail order.
The bench reacted strongly and questioned the action of the jail authorities and hinted at contempt proceedings.
"It is a travesty of justice that on the ground of non-mention of the sub-section, the petitioner who was ordered to be released is still kept behind bars," the court said.
The court warned both the parties that if the allegations of the petitioner turn out to be false, there will be consequences, including possible bail withdrawal. However, if it is proved that the jail authorities stopped the release due to technical lapses, contempt proceedings will be initiated.
"Do not take this court lightly! If we find that the sub-section was the only reason, we will initiate contempt proceedings, as this is a matter of liberty," warned Justice Vishwanathan.
The court has listed the matter for the next day and is expected to have the Superintendent Jailor appear in person, while the DG (Prisons), UP will appear through video conferencing.
Case Title: AFTAB Versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH, MA 1086/2025 in Crl.A. No. 2295/2025
