Delhi High Court issues contempt notice to DG Prisons over stalled open prison reforms, after a subordinate officer, not the DG himself, filed an incomplete compliance affidavit.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued a contempt notice to the Director General (Prisons), Delhi, for failing to swear a compliance affidavit personally on the implementation of the Supreme Court’s directions on open prison reforms, and for instead having a subordinate file an affidavit with incomplete information. The notice is not a finding of contempt, and the DG Prisons will have the opportunity to respond [Suo motu proceedings on open correctional institutions].
A Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma observed that the DG Prisons had shown “complete disregard” for the Court’s orders by not filing an affidavit in his own signature despite being specifically directed to look into the matter.
How the case reached here
The proceedings arise from the Supreme Court’s directions of February 26, 2026 on the effective use and expansion of Open Correctional Institutions across the country. The apex court emphasised that open prisons must work as meaningful institutions of reform and rehabilitation. It directed all States and Union Territories to set up monitoring committees headed by the Executive Chairman of the State Legal Services Authority, and asked High Courts to register suo motu writ petitions as continuing mandamus to monitor compliance, following the lack of progress after its earlier directions in In Re: Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons.
Under the High Court’s October 13 order, the senior-most officer from Tihar Jail was expected to be present with instructions. At the October 15 hearing, the DG Prisons and the Principal Secretary (Home) appeared physically, and an assurance was recorded that a date-wise account of developments, in the form of a flow chart, would be placed before the Court.
What the Court said
The Bench said that, after the October 15 hearing, “the least that was expected” was that the DG Prisons or the Principal Secretary (Home) would swear an affidavit. The State’s counsel instead pointed to an affidavit sworn by the Superintendent at Delhi Prisons headquarters, Tihar. When confronted, the Court recorded, the Special Secretary (Home) joined the hearing virtually only after it had begun, and the State’s counsel was “handicapped” by the lack of assistance from the concerned officers.
Remarking on the pace of compliance, the Court said:
“perhaps after order of the apex court the matter has not moved an inch ahead on reporting compliance on directions of the apex court.”
It described the officials’ approach as “callous and insensitive” and said the authorities needed to be made “sensitive” to the apex court’s directions. The Bench also noted that only one meeting of the State Monitoring Committee had been held, on September 1, 2026, and that although it was chaired by the Secretary of the Delhi State Legal Services Authority, the government had not nominated the competent officer as required. Certain directions requiring States to amend their rules had also not been implemented.
The options before the Court and the directions
The Court said it could either initiate contempt proceedings by referring the matter to the Supreme Court, which issued the original directions, or proceed against senior officers under the Contempt of Courts Act. The Special Secretary (Home), who said he had recently taken over the department, sought two weeks to place a paragraph-wise compliance report on record and assured the Court that the next meeting of the monitoring committee, scheduled for October 30, would be attended by the senior officers concerned. The Delhi Government’s counsel gave the same assurance.
In view of these assurances, the Court deferred its decision on issuing a contempt notice to the Chief Secretary. It directed that the contempt notice to the DG Prisons be served within one week and that his response be filed by the next date. Replies are to be placed before the Court by November 18, and the matter is listed for further hearing on November 20.
Case Title: Suo motu proceedings on Open Correctional Institutions, Delhi (case number not available)
Bench: Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma, Delhi High Court
Date of Order: October 28, 2026
Next Hearing: November 20, 2026
Appearances: Not available