The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday criticised the Uttar Pradesh government for delaying the release of a Muslim man by 28 days despite granting him bail, citing a minor clerical error, and ordered ₹5 lakh as interim compensation along with a judicial inquiry into the lapse, LiveLaw reported.
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, comprising Justice K V Viswanathan and Justice N K Singh, was hearing the case of a man arrested under Section 366 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 5(i) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.
The Supreme Court had granted him bail on April 29, but due to an omission of the sub-section (i) in the bail order, it only mentioned Section 5 instead of Section 5(i), the prison authorities refused to release him.
Despite a release order being issued on May 27, the man remained at Ghaziabad Jail until June 24. The bench made it clear that this kind of delay was not acceptable and that people cannot be kept in jail over such minor technical issues.
“Liberty is precious,” the Court said, quoting Article 21 of the Constitution, which protects the right to personal freedom.
The judges criticised the jail officials for clinging to a small technicality and warned that such conduct sends a “wrong message” and violates the basic rights of citizens.
“If a person is clearly eligible for release, why nitpick over a minor error?” asked Justice Viswanathan.
The bench said the authorities should focus on the substance of the bail order rather than irrelevant technicalities. It also questioned the justification given by the state’s Additional Advocate General, Garima Prashad, who argued that the delay is due to the missing sub-section.
The Court rejected this argument, calling it “unacceptable” and warned that the compensation could be increased to ₹10 lakh if such attitudes continued.
The Court also pointed out that the jail officials clearly understood the bail order since they released the prisoner just a day before the hearing, indicating that the missing sub-section was not a genuine obstacle.
“What message are we sending if people are left in jail for clerical errors?” the Court asked.
The Jail Superintendent of Ghaziabad was present in court physically, while the UP Deputy Inspector General (Prisons) joined via video conferencing.
The DIG told the Court that a departmental inquiry was already underway. However, the judges directed that a judicial inquiry be conducted instead, stating that a judge must look into the reasons for the delay and check if there was negligence or any more serious issue involved.
The inquiry will now be carried out by the Principal District and Sessions Judge of Ghaziabad. The Court has also recorded the UP DIG’s assurance that officials will be better trained to handle such matters in the future.
Calling this “unfortunate” and “preposterous,” the Court noted that “liberty is a very valuable and precious right guaranteed to a person. It cannot be bartered on these useless technicalities.”
Expressing serious concern over systemic failures and the possible suffering of others in similar situations, the court said, “We only hope that no other convict/undertrial is languishing in jail on account of similar technicality,” adding that the Director General of Prisons had assured an inquiry and measures to ensure such lapses do not recur.
The Court also stated that once compensation is finalised, it would consider recovering the amount from the responsible officers.
