Fourteen students of Jawaharlal Nehru University walked out of jail on Sunday (March 1) after a Delhi court made it clear that procedural delays could not override a judicial order granting them bail. The court directed their immediate release, observing that administrative formalities should not effectively nullify the relief already granted.

The students had secured bail on Friday following their arrest during a protest organised by the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union against remarks made by vice-chancellor Shantisree Dhulipudi Pandit.

However, they remained in custody as police had yet to complete verification of their permanent addresses, a condition imposed at the time bail was granted.

Judicial Magistrate (First Class) Ravi of the Patiala House courts underscored that verification requirements must not be stretched to the point where they undermine the very purpose of bail.

“Although the said judgment pertained to verification of surety bonds by jail authorities and police after grant of interim bail, the underlying constitutional principle is clearly that procedural formalities cannot be so protracted as to render the judicial order of bail illusory,” the judge observed, according to PTI.

The arrests followed days of escalating tensions between students and the university administration. The protest march had been called over demands including the implementation of a proposed Rohith Act, restoration of the University Grants Commission’s equity regulations and reversal of funding cuts to universities.

Students had also sought the resignation of the vice-chancellor over remarks that were widely criticised as derogatory and casteist, in which she described Dalit and backward-class assertion for dignity as “playing the victim card“.

When granting bail, the court had stipulated that the students’ permanent addresses be verified, noting that some had not disclosed them.

Given that many of the accused are from different states, their counsel argued that completing verification across the country would inevitably take time, especially with intervening travel constraints and bank holidays. In the absence of furnished bail bonds, the students were remanded to 14 days of judicial custody.

Subsequently, the defence filed an application urging the court to allow their release without waiting for address verification to conclude. Appearing for the students, advocates Abhik Chimni and Sidharth Ganeshan contended that continued detention on account of pending verification amounted to an indefinite extension of custody despite a bail order.

The prosecution opposed the plea, informing the court that officers had already been dispatched to verify the addresses and warning that premature release could raise the possibility of the accused absconding.

In its ruling, however, the court held that while verification serves an important purpose, it cannot become a barrier that prolongs incarceration. The judge also recorded that the investigating officer had attributed the delay to logistical factors such as travel and bank holidays, not to any non-cooperation by the accused.

Emphasising that the students are young and not habitual offenders, the court observed that keeping them behind bars after bail had been granted would adversely affect their academic pursuits, and ordered that they be released without further delay.