Blatant abuse of power: Delhi HC initiates contempt case against Tihar jail superintendent for frustrating parole order

The Delhi High Court has initiated contempt of court proceedings against a superintendent at Tihar jail for not releasing an undertrial from prison despite court directions to release him on parole [Anwar Hussain Vs State NCT of Delhi].

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav took note of the lapse after the prisoner, Anwar Hussan, who had been in jail as an undertrial accused for over 5 years, challenged the jail superintendent’s refusal to release him on parole. 

The Court had allowed Hussain’s release on parole subject to the terms and conditions to be fixed by the jail. However, instead of fixing such terms, the jail superintendent made “flimsy and untenable excuses” to prolong Hussain's incarceration, the Court found.

The Court termed this a blatant abuse of the jail superintendent's powers that violated Hussain's constitutional right to personal liberty. 

The jail superintendent had attempted to frustrate a judicial order and made a mockery of the legal system, the Court held.

The Court had earlier granted Hussain parole for a period of four weeks by an order dated July 30. In the said order, the Court added that the jail authorities may fix appropriate conditions for Hussain's release on parole. However, the jail superintendent did not fix any such conditions. Hussain, therefore, approached the Court again for relied.

By an order dated August 11, the Court itself fixed the terms of Hussain’s release of parole.

However, when Hussain's family approached the jail authorities for his release on parole, the jail superintendent again refused to release him. The superintendent said that he would not act on the August 11 order unless it is recieved directly from the court.

Taking a dim view of this, the Court observed,

"Notably, the order dated 11.08.2026 was a digitally signed public document and its veracity could be easily discovered. The Jail Authority in an attempt to frustrate the order of the Court, and prevent the petitioner from being released, seems to have given a flimsy and unjustifiable reason."

Thereafter, Hussain again approached the Court with another application seeking his release on parole. On September 8, the Court directed the jail superintendent to appear physically before it and explain his conduct.

It was submitted on behalf of the jail superintendent that his actions were not motivated by ill-will or malice. It was stated that Hussain was not released because the authority was unable to verify the address where Hussain would reside, which is a routine and customary condition.

The Court took exception to this explanation. It stated that the Court's August 11 order did not mention any condition pertaining to Hussain’s residence.

The Court observed that the conduct of the jail superintendent to impose additional conditions for Hussain's release on parole was in teeth of the August 11 order and constituted a wilful violation of the order.

“While Dr. (Pawan) Kumar has cleverly tried to justify the blatant abuse of the powers vested in the office of the Jail Superintendent, by making references to catch phrases such as 'customary' and 'routine', the fact of the matter remains, that he wants the Court to allow the Jail Authority to impose conditions over and above those imposed by the Court in its order dated 11.08.2026,” the Court stated.

Therefore, the Court initiated contempt proceedings against the jail superintendent. The matter will be heard next on September 22. 

Advocate Shannu Baghel appeared for Hussain.

Advocate Sangeet Sibou and standing counsel Rahul Tyagi represented the Delhi Police.

[Read order]