Don’t Keep Prisoners Waiting After Bail: Allahabad HC Orders Instant Release via Electronic System

The Allahabad High Court has directed that every bail application filed before it or its Lucknow Bench must clearly mention the jail where the accused or convict is lodged, observing that such details are essential to ensure timely communication of bail orders and prevent unnecessary incarceration of released prisoners.

The bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal issued the direction while granting bail to Sohrab alias Sorab Ali, an accused booked under Sections 137(2) and 87 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, in connection with a case at Saini police station in Kaushambi district. The applicant had been in custody since September 25, 2025.

The prosecution had alleged that the applicant had enticed away the daughter of the complainant. However, the High Court noted that the girl, in her statement under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), stated that she had left home on her own accord. Taking into account the nature of the allegations and the fact that the charge sheet had already been filed, the court held that further custody was unwarranted and directed his release on bail.

Granting bail, the court imposed standard conditions requiring the applicant to cooperate with the trial, refrain from influencing witnesses, and abstain from any criminal activity during the period of bail.

While deciding the bail plea, the court also took a broader view of systemic lapses in implementing the Supreme Court’s 2023 directions in Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 4 of 2021 [(2024) 10 SCC 685]. Justice Deshwal noted that many undertrials remain in jail even after bail is granted due to procedural delays or lack of coordination between courts and prison authorities.

The judge cited multiple instances where prisoners could not be informed of their bail orders because the High Court lacked details of the jails they were lodged in. “It has become difficult to directly send a copy of the bail order to the accused applicant due to non-availability of jail details,” the court observed, adding that this situation undermines the right to personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Expressing concern about corruption and inefficiency in surety verification, the court also directed that verification of sureties be carried out electronically within court premises. Justice Deshwal emphasized that once bail is granted, the undertrial’s release should be prompt and not delayed due to administrative indifference. Citing Rule 91 of the U.P. Jail Manual, 2002, the judge reminded jail authorities that release orders must ordinarily be complied with the same day they are received.

To streamline the process, the court issued a series of operational directions. Advocates are now required to include jail details in all bail petitions filed from December 1, 2025 onwards. The High Court’s Reporting Section has been instructed not to clear any bail application lacking this information. The Central Project Coordinator (CPC) of the High Court has been asked to coordinate with the National Informatics Centre (NIC) to secure direct access to the e-prison portal for transmitting bail orders electronically.

Additionally, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) has been directed to facilitate electronic verification of sureties in district courts, while the Director General (Prison) must ensure that inmates are released immediately upon receipt of electronic release orders through the Bail Order Management System (BOMS).

Case Title: Sohrab Alias Sorab Ali vs. State of U.P.

Order Date: November 4, 2025

Bench: Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal