The Supreme Court stressed that every accused has a fundamental right to a fair and speedy trial, ruling that no individual can be left languishing in jail endlessly without their case being heard and decided.
The Supreme Court stated that an accused individual cannot be kept in jail without receiving a fair and prompt trial.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and K. V. Viswanathan instructed the trial court to expedite the proceedings and conclude the trial within two years, given that over 100 witnesses need to be examined by the prosecution.
This ruling came in response to two appeals challenging an April 2022 decision by the Karnataka High Court, which granted bail to one accused while denying it to another co-accused.
Also Read: Supreme Court: “Accused Cannot Be Found Guilty Solely Based on Circumstantial Evidence”
The Centre’s appeal contested the bail grant, while the other appeal was filed by the co-accused who was refused bail.
An FIR was lodged in Bengaluru in January 2020 against 17 individuals for alleged offenses, including violations under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
The case was later assigned to the National Investigation Agency, which filed a chargesheet in July 2020.
The bench remarked,
“However, the fact remains that the trial has not commenced despite the lapse of five-and-a-half years. Accused cannot be allowed to languish in jail without being given a fair and speedy trial,”
The court found the reasons for granting and denying bail to the two accused to be fully justified and reasonable. The high court had noted that the allegations in the chargesheet related to the accused’s connections with an organization that was not banned under UAPA.
The bench declined to interfere with the high court’s decision to grant bail to the accused. In addressing the plea of the co-accused who was denied bail, the bench highlighted that the high court had found his involvement with banned terrorist organizations and his active participation in dark web activities supporting these groups.
Affirming that the high court was justified in denying him bail, it stated,
“The reasons given by the high court are based upon the material collected during investigation and as reflected in the chargesheet,”
While dismissing the appeals, the Supreme Court directed the prosecution to fully cooperate in presenting evidence and ensuring the trial concludes within the specified timeframe, urging the accused to cooperate as well.
The bench also mentioned that the trial court or the prosecuting agency could seek the cancellation of bail if it was determined that the accused was attempting to delay the trial.