New Delhi, June 24 (IANS) The Supreme Court on Tuesday summoned the Uttar Pradesh Director General (DG) of Prisons and the Senior Superintendent of Ghaziabad District Jail over non-release of an accused from custody on the ground that a sub-section of the anti-conversion law under which he was booked was omitted in the bail order.
Terming it a “travesty of justice”, a Bench of Justices K.V. Viswanathan and N.K. Singh ordered the Senior Superintendent of Ghaziabad District Jail to appear in person before the top court at 10.30 am on Wednesday, and asked the DG, Prisons, to appear through the video-conferencing facility.
After the accused, Aftab, was denied release by the district jail administration, he moved a miscellaneous application before the apex court seeking modification of the bail order to specifically include Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.
As per the application, filed by advocate Abhishek Singh, the release order issued by the Ghaziabad Additional District and Sessions Judge was returned by jail authorities on the ground that the case details as recorded in the jail register reflect “Case Crime No. 2/24, under Section 366 IPC and Sections 3/5(1) of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, Police Station – Wave City, District – Ghaziabad,” did not match the particulars mentioned in the release order.
Taking a very stern view of the alleged violation of judicial orders, the apex court hinted at initiating contempt proceedings against the jail officials if the contents of the petitioner’s application are found to be true.
At the same time, the Justice Viswanathan-led Bench cautioned the petitioner of serious action, including recall of the bail order, if the averments made against jail authorities are found untrue.
In an order passed on April 29, the Supreme Court had granted bail to the accused, in view of the fact that his parents are Hindu and Muslim, and the marriage was performed as per Hindu rites and customs.
Allowing the criminal appeal, the then CJI Sanjiv Khanna-led Bench had directed the accused to released on bail during the pendency of the trial in connection with criminal case registered under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC),1860 and Sections 3 and 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021.
Asking the trial court to determine the terms and conditions of bail, the top court told the accused to provide one mobile number on which he can be contacted by the Investigating Officer/Station House Officer concerned to ascertain his whereabouts, while he is on bail. It had clarified that the observations made in the order granting bail will not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
–IANS
pds/vd
