'Time to consider issue of delay, bail in true prospective', Supreme Court allows bail to UAPA accused

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said time has come to consider the issue of delay and bail in its true and proper perspective as inordinate delays in trial resulting in long incarceration of the accused is not only bad for him and extremely bad for the victims, but also for Indian society and for the credibility of our valued justice system.

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan emphasised at the need for the trial courts and public prosecutors to ensure long list of witnesses do not affect the right to speedy trial, while granting bail to Tapas Kumar Palit arrested on March 24, 2020, under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, in Chhattisgarh for carrying Naxalite materials.

The court objected to list of 100 witnesses sought to be examined by the prosecution, holding no useful purpose would be served if 10 witnesses are examined to establish one particular fact.

"It is expected of the public prosecutor to wisely exercise his discretion in so far as examination of the witnesses is concerned. Where the number of witnesses is large, it is not, in our opinion, necessary that everyone should be produced," the bench said in its judgment on February 14, 2025.

Stressing on the role of judges in such a situation, the court said they are the masters of their courtrooms, and the Criminal Procedure Code provided many tools for them to use in order to ensure that cases proceed efficiently.

"If an accused is to get a final verdict after incarceration of six to seven years in jail as an undertrial prisoner, then, definitely, it could be said that his right to have a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution has been infringed," the bench said.

The court noted the stress of long trials on accused persons – who remain innocent until proven guilty – can also be significant.

"Accused persons are not financially compensated for what might be a lengthy period of pretrial incarceration. They may also have lost a job or accommodation, experienced damage to personal relationships while incarcerated, and spent a considerable amount of money on legal fees. If an accused person is found not guilty, they have likely endured many months of being stigmatised and perhaps even ostracised in their community and will have to rebuild their lives with their own resources," the bench pointed out.

In the case at hand, the court clarified it was not undermining the seriousness of the crime that has been alleged.

"However, many times we have made ourselves very clear that howsoever serious a crime may be the accused has a fundamental right of speedy trial as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution," the bench said.

In the case, the court said, it was left with no other option but to order release of the appellant on bail as he has been in jail for five years and the state counsel has no idea as to how long it would take to complete the trial in view of 100 witnesses sought to be examined by the prosecution.

Allowing the appeal against the Chhattisgarh High Court's denial of bail on February 16, 2022, the court also noted the accused had no other antecedents and the panch witnesses to the recovery panchnama have also turned hostile.