The Supreme Court granted bail to a UAPA accused kept in jail for over two years without a chargesheet. The Court called the prolonged detention “appalling” and held the custody illegal under default bail rules.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has granted bail to a man booked under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) after he remained in jail for more than two years without a chargesheet.
The Court strongly criticised the delay and questioned how the police and prosecution could justify keeping someone in custody for such a long period without completing the investigation.
ALSO READ: BREAKING| Delhi High Court Allows PFI to Challenge UAPA Ban
During the hearing, Justice Sandeep Mehta expressed severe concern over the manner of arrest and prolonged detention, saying,
“How can you keep someone behind bars for two years without a chargesheet? This is appalling. How is this arrest legal?”
The bench noted that the Constitution guarantees the right to personal liberty and that such delays strike at the heart of fair procedure.
According to the case record, the petitioner had been arrested on July 23, 2023, over the alleged possession of Rs 3.25 lakh. However, the chargesheet in the case was filed only on July 30, 2025—two years after the arrest.
The Court observed that under Section 43 of the UAPA, the rules on default bail still apply, and once the statutory period is over, the accused cannot be kept in custody without filing a chargesheet.
The bench stressed that the long delay made the detention illegal and violated the accused’s legal rights. It also took into account that the petitioner had already been granted default bail in two related cases based on the same set of allegations.
Considering all these factors, the Supreme Court concluded that there was no justification for continued custody and allowed the bail request.
ALSO READ: 2019 UAPA Amendment| ‘Always Approach High Court First’: Supreme Court
The order stated that the prolonged custody without a chargesheet was a clear breach of the law, and default bail must be granted when the mandatory period is crossed.
With this decision, the Court has once again underlined that even in stringent laws like UAPA, the investigating agencies must follow procedural safeguards and cannot detain someone endlessly without completing the investigation.
