The Supreme Court on Tuesday summoned Uttar Pradesh’s director general of prisons and the superintendent of Ghaziabad district jail over the continued incarceration of a man despite being granted bail by the apex court nearly two months ago, calling it a “travesty of justice”.
A bench of justices KV Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh, sitting during the partial court working days, said, “It is travesty of justice that on the ground the sub-section is not mentioned in the order of release, the petitioner till date has been kept behind bars.”
The bench expressed displeasure that Aftab, the accused, remained in jail after a Supreme Court order on April 29 granted him bail, with jail authorities refusing to release him over a technicality.
“Do not take the order of the Supreme Court for granted,” the court warned.
“This calls for a serious enquiry. We direct the superintendent of Ghaziabad Jail to be personally present in court tomorrow. We direct the DG prisons of Uttar Pradesh to appear online.”
“This case presents an unfortunate scenario,” the bench said. “It is stated by the petitioner that he is unable to secure release even after furnishing bail bond and sureties.” The delay, the bench noted, was due to the Supreme Court order citing Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, instead of specifically mentioning Section 5(1), under which Aftab was formally charged.
{{/usCountry}}“This case presents an unfortunate scenario,” the bench said. “It is stated by the petitioner that he is unable to secure release even after furnishing bail bond and sureties.” The delay, the bench noted, was due to the Supreme Court order citing Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, instead of specifically mentioning Section 5(1), under which Aftab was formally charged.
{{/usCountry}}Calling the reason for delay “ridiculous,” the court said it would initiate contempt proceedings if this omission was found to be the sole cause.
“If we find that this sub-clause was the reason, we will proceed with contempt as it is a matter of personal liberty,” the bench said. However, the court also warned the petitioner of serious consequences if the delay was due to any other pending case or misleading information.
The state found fault with the April 29 order passed by a bench headed by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Saniv Khanna for not mentioning the exact provision of the offence with which Aftab was charged. While the order mentioned sections 3 and 5 of the Act, jail authorities insisted that their records showed Section 5(1) and refused to act upon the order for the absence of sub-clause 1.
Aftab had approached the court through his lawyer, Abhishek Singh, seeking clarification and modification of the April 29 bail order to include the correct subsection.
The April 29 order categorically noted the case details, the FIR number and the police station which recording the fact that the crime registered at Wave City, Ghaziabad police station on January 3, 2024 was a marriage where the petitioner, Aftab married a Hindu girl as per Hindu rites at the Arya Samaj Mandir. A day later, a criminal case was registered on a complaint by the girl’s aunt who alleged her niece was kidnapped. Police arrested Aftab on January 10, 2024.
The order had said, “We are of the opinion that the appellant, Aftab, has made out a case for grant of bail. Accordingly, we accept the present appeal and direct that the appellant, Aftab, shall be released on bail during the pendency of the trial.”
The family deposited a personal bond of ₹1.5 lakh and two sureties as required by the trial court, but prison authorities insisted the documentation was inconsistent as the order did not match the charges listed in their jail records, which specified Section 5(1).