Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
exit_to_app
The era of hit and run is over!
access_time 2025-07-03T14:18:09+05:30
Supreme Courts laudable reservation decision
access_time 2025-07-03T12:47:16+05:30
You too, Tharoor!
access_time 2025-07-02T12:11:10+05:30
Whose failure is it when the system fails?
access_time 2025-07-01T09:44:58+05:30
Citizenship rights, human rights
access_time 2025-06-30T09:30:06+05:30
DEEP READ
Ukraine
access_time 2023-08-16T11:16:47+05:30
Espionage in the UK
access_time 2025-06-13T22:20:13+05:30
Yet another air tragedy
access_time 2025-06-13T09:45:02+05:30
The Russian plan: Invade Japan and South Korea
access_time 2025-01-16T15:32:24+05:30
exit_to_app
Homechevron_rightIndiachevron_right‘Travesty of justice’:...

‘Travesty of justice’: SC summons UP jailer for not releasing prisoner despite bail order

text_fields
bookmark_border
‘Travesty of justice’: SC summons UP jailer for not releasing prisoner despite bail order
cancel

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday called the continued detention of a man after he was granted bail a ‘travesty of justice’.

The man was not yet released from Ghaziabad district jail, nevertheless the apex court had granted him bail in April in a case under Uttar Pradesh’s anti-conversion law, according to Scroll.

Taking note of the gravity of the situation, a bench of Justices KV Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh asked the superintendent jailor of the prison to appear before the court on Wednesday.

The bench also directed the Uttar Pradesh Director General of Prisons to appear via video conferencing.

The court’s response came after the prisoner revealed that he was still in jail despite the bail.

Prisoner reportedly alleged that he was not released because a sub-section of the provision he was charged with was not mentioned in the bail order, PTI reported.

The man was charged with kidnapping, abducting or compelling a woman to marry against her will alongside sections of the 2021 Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act.

Calling the incident ‘ridiculous’, the court warned of contempt action against jail authorities in the event of petitioner’s allegation are proved to be true.

The bench made it clear that the ‘concerned sections are clearly mentioned’ in the order on April 29, adding that it calls for ‘a serious inquiry’.

The court warned that action would be taken against the petitioner if his statement proved incorrect or if he was detained due to ‘some other case’.

‘But if we find that this sub-clause was the reason, we will initiate contempt proceedings because it's a matter of liberty,’ the bench reportedly said, adding, ‘Do not take this court for granted!’

Show Full Article
TAGS:Supreme Court Ghaziabad district jail Uttarpradesh 
Next Story