Justice Delayed: Supreme Court Grants Bail, Demands Speedy Trials.


The present appeal of Siddhant Sidharth Balu Taktode vs The State of Maharashtra & Another challenges the decision of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, which upheld the rejection of bail by the Additional Special Judge in a case under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA). The appellant argued that the case against him relied solely on one prior criminal record and that he had been 26 km away from the scene of the incident, supported by photographic evidence. The appellant, who was arrested at the age of 21, had been incarcerated for five years, and thus sought bail.

The prosecution opposed the bail, claiming that the appellant was part of a gang responsible for criminal activities. The High Court had dismissed the appellant’s appeal, citing lack of reasonable grounds for believing the appellant was not guilty, and concerns about potential re-offending if released.


 

 
 
 

However, the Supreme Court found the delay in the appellant’s trial concerning, noting the failure to frame charges over the last six years. The Court referenced its earlier decision emphasizing the right to a speedy trial, which is part of constitutional rights under Articles 19 and 21. The prolonged detention without trial amounted to a violation of these rights. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashing the lower court’s orders and granting bail under strict conditions, including a bond, residence reporting, and regular court appearances.

The Court also addressed the systemic delay in trial proceedings, urging relevant authorities to devise a mechanism to ensure timely production of accused persons before trial courts to avoid prolonged delays in trials.


Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999  

Section 19, Constitution of India - 1950  

Section 21, Constitution of India - 1950  

Constitution of India, 1950