The Supreme Court on Wednesday slammed the Uttar Pradesh jail authorities for the delayed release of a man granted bail nearly two months ago. The man, accused under the state’s anti-conversion law, had been granted bail by the apex court on 29 April but remained in custody until 24 June.
A bench comprising Justices K V Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh expressed deep concern over the violation of the accused’s fundamental rights, noting that such delays strike at the heart of constitutional freedoms. “Liberty is a very valuable and precious right guaranteed under the Constitution,” the bench stated, highlighting the importance of Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.
The court directed the Uttar Pradesh government to pay an ad hoc compensation of ₹5 lakh to the accused for the undue delay in his release. The order came as the bench questioned the Director General of Prisons, Uttar Pradesh, who appeared via video-conferencing.
“What do you propose to do to sensitise your officers?” the bench asked, calling on state officials to be made more aware of the critical importance of individual liberty.
According to the state’s counsel, the accused was finally released on 24 June from Ghaziabad district jail, and an internal inquiry has been launched to understand the reasons behind the delay.
The court, however, insisted on an independent investigation. It directed that the inquiry be carried out by the Principal District and Sessions Judge of Ghaziabad and that a detailed report be submitted to the court.
The Supreme Court’s intervention came after it took strong exception to claims made by the accused, who alleged that jail officials refused to release him on grounds that a specific sub-section of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, had not been cited in the bail order.
The bench had earlier noted that following its bail order on 29 April, a Ghaziabad trial court on 27 May had issued a release order to the jail superintendent. The release was conditional on the execution of a personal bond and provided there were no other legal grounds for continued detention.
