14 February 2025 Bail and Antcipatory Bail >> Criminal Law   |   Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law   |   Criminal Trial >> Criminal Law  

The Supreme Court of India has granted bail to an accused held in custody since March 2020 under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and other charges, citing the prolonged trial and the fundamental right to a speedy trial. The court criticized the prosecution's intention to examine 100 witnesses, emphasizing the need for efficient trial proceedings and judicial oversight to prevent undue delays.

The appellant, arrested with items allegedly linked to Naxalite activities, had been awaiting trial for nearly five years. With only 42 of the intended 100 prosecution witnesses examined, and no clear timeline for completion, the court deemed the continued detention unjust. Despite acknowledging the seriousness of the charges, the court prioritized the accused's right to a timely trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The court highlighted the importance of judicious witness selection by the Public Prosecutor, citing a Privy Council ruling that advocated for discretion in calling witnesses. It also stressed the Special Judge's role in questioning the necessity of repetitive witness testimonies. The judgment underscored the severe consequences of prolonged trials for undertrials, including social stigma, financial hardship, and loss of livelihood, emphasizing that "delays are bad for the accused and extremely bad for the victims, for Indian society and for the credibility of our justice system."

The Supreme Court ordered the appellant's release on bail, imposing conditions including a prohibition from entering the Kanker district in Chhattisgarh, except for the final stages of the trial. He is required to attend hearings online. The court warned that any breach of conditions would result in automatic bail cancellation. This ruling serves as a strong reminder of the judiciary's commitment to upholding the right to a speedy trial and ensuring fairness in criminal proceedings.

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967