High Court Declining Bail In Such Matters Gives Impression That Different Considerations Played: SC

Supreme Court Criticizes Allahabad High Court for Denying Bail Under Anti-Conversion Law

 

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court strongly criticized the Allahabad High Court for denying bail to an accused under the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. The apex court emphasized that judicial discretion must be exercised judiciously, warning that unwarranted delays in granting bail not only overburden the judiciary but also undermine justice.

 

Case Background

 

The case involved Maulvi Syed Shad Kazmi Mohd. Shad, a madrasa teacher accused of forcibly converting a mentally challenged minor to Islam. Charged under IPC Sections 504 and 506 and Section 3 of the anti-conversion law, he had spent over 11 months in custody. While he maintained that he had only provided shelter to the abandoned minor, the state argued that his alleged actions warranted strict punishment, with imprisonment of up to ten years.

 

Supreme Court’s Observations

 

Hearing the case (SLP(Cr) No. 1059/2025), a bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan expressed serious concerns about the reluctance of lower courts to grant bail in non-heinous offenses. The key points from the judgment included:

 

1. Judicial Discretion Must Align with Law: The court stressed that bail decisions should follow legal principles rather than personal biases. It remarked, "Discretion does not mean declining bail based on subjective views. The petitioner is entitled to a fair trial, and if guilty, will be punished accordingly."

 

 

2. Lower Courts Must Show Judicial Courage: The bench noted that unnecessary bail denials lead to an overload of cases in higher courts. It criticized the High Court, stating that the trial court itself should have granted bail.

 

 

3. Arbitrary Decision-Making Must Be Avoided: The court highlighted the importance of ensuring that bail decisions are legally sound rather than influenced by extraneous factors, pointing out that numerous workshops and seminars train judges in the proper application of bail provisions.

 

 

4. Seriousness of Offense Must Be Assessed Fairly: While acknowledging the gravity of certain crimes, the court distinguished the present case from heinous offenses like murder or dacoity, suggesting that the denial of bail was unwarranted.

 

 

 

Final Verdict

 

Finding the High Court’s approach unjustified, the Supreme Court granted bail to the petitioner, directing the trial court to set appropriate conditions for his release. It also urged for a speedy trial, clarifying that its decision should not influence the determination of guilt or innocence.

 

In a parting remark, the bench reminded the judiciary that the real purpose of law is to uphold justice, not to needlessly prolong incarceration.