Bail:
Grant of bail – By High Court – To the accused charged for offences u/ss. 143, 147, 148, 120-B, 341, 427, 323, 324, 326, 506(H), 201, 202, 153A, 212, 307 and 149 IPC; u/s. 3 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and ss. 16, 18, 18-B, 19 and 20 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – On the ground that the undertrialaccused could not be kept in custody for too long when the trial was not likely to commence in near future – By setting aside the order of Special Court who had declined to grant bail to the accused primarily in view of the bar against grant of bail u/s. 43-D(5) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: The liberty guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective ambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and speedy trial – Undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained, pending trial – Once it is obvious that a timely trial would not be possible and the accused has suffered incarceration for a significant period of time, courts would ordinarily be obliged to enlarge them on bail– The statutory restrictions per se do not oust the ability of Constitutional Courts to grant bail on grounds of violation of Part III of the Constitution – Such statutory restrictions and the powers exercisable under constitutional jurisdiction can be harmonised – The restriction u/s. 43-D(5) under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act is less stringent than the restriction provided under s. 37 of NDPS Act – The accused in the present case has been in jail for more than five years; none of the convicted thirteen co-accused have been sentenced for more than
8 years RI and that 276 witnesses are left to be examined – In the facts of the case, High Court was left with no other option, but to grant bail – However, in addition to the conditions to be imposed by the trial Court while releasing the accused on bail, some more conditions are imposed – Appeals are dismissed. Shaheen Welfare Association v. Union of India (1996)
2 SCC 616 : [1996] 2 SCR 1123; Hussain v. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702 : [2017] 2 SCR 626; Paramjit Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi) (1999) 9 SCC 252; Babba alias Shankar Raghuman Rohida v. State of
Maharashtra (2005) 11 SCC 569; Umarmia alias
Mamumia v. State of Gujarat (2017) 2 SCC 731; Angela Harish Sontakke v. State of Maharashtra 2021 (2) SCALE 301; Sagar Tatyaram Gorkhe v. State of
Maharashtra 2021 (2) SCALE 302; Supreme Court
Legal Aid Committee Representing Undertrial Prisoners v. Union of India (1994) 6 SCC 731 : [1994] 4 Suppl. SCR 386 – relied on.
National Investigation Agency v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali (2019) 5 SCC 1 : [2019] 5 SCR 1060distinguished Puran v. Rambilas (2001) 6 SCC 338 : [2001] 3 SCR 432; Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Admn.) (1978) 1 SCC 118 : [1978] 2 SCR 358; State of Bihar v. Rajballav Prasad (2017) 2 SCC 178 : [2016] 9 SCR 652 –
referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.