The Supreme Court criticised the Allahabad High Court for denying bail despite prolonged incarceration, holding that the accused’s Article 21 right to speedy trial had been infringed.
Supreme Court Terms Denial Of Bail “Shocking”
The Supreme Court recently granted bail to murder accused Vaibhav Singh, who had remained in custody for almost nine years as an undertrial.
The Court observed that the delay had violated his fundamental right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
A Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan strongly criticised the Allahabad High Court’s order refusing bail.
The Bench described the matter as “very shocking” and the impugned order as “very disappointing.”
Accused Remained In Custody Since 2017
Vaibhav Singh was arrested on March 7, 2017.
The case arose from offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120-B and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case was registered at Police Station Cantt., Gorakhpur.
After investigation, the prosecution filed a charge sheet. Thereafter, the matter went to the Sessions Court.
However, the trial remained pending for years. Meanwhile, the petitioner continued to remain in jail.
Allahabad High Court Misread Precedent, Says Supreme Court
The Supreme Court found fault with the Allahabad High Court’s reliance on X v State of Rajasthan, 2024 INSC 909.
The High Court had used that judgment to deny bail after the trial had commenced.
It had observed that once trial begins, courts should ordinarily not grant bail. It also said courts should not examine discrepancies in evidence at that stage.
However, the Supreme Court held that the High Court failed to understand the true import of the precedent.
It also said the High Court ignored the petitioner’s prolonged incarceration.
Seriousness Of Offence Cannot Justify Endless Custody
The Bench reiterated that the gravity of an offence alone cannot justify continued imprisonment.
It said an accused cannot remain in jail indefinitely when the trial suffers long delay without any fault on his part.
“In many of our judgments and on many occasions, we have said in so many words that howsoever grave the crime may be, but if the accused is denied his right of speedy trial and is languishing in jail for years together and for no fault on his part, he cannot be kept in jail for indefinite period,” the Court observed.
Article 21 Violation Clear From Record
The Supreme Court said the record clearly showed infringement of the petitioner’s right to speedy trial.
Therefore, the Court said it did not need to wait for the State to appear before granting relief.
“We believe we should not wait even for the State to appear. This is a gross case wherein the fundamental right of the petitioner to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution could be said to have been infringed,” the Court stated.
Bail Ordered Subject To Trial Court Conditions
Accordingly, the Supreme Court directed the release of Vaibhav Singh on bail forthwith.
The Court said the trial court shall impose appropriate terms and conditions.
However, the order will apply only if the petitioner is not required in any other case.
Bench Had Earlier Criticised Bail Orders
This is not the first instance where a Bench led by Justice Pardiwala has criticised the Allahabad High Court in bail matters.
Recently, after similar criticism, a High Court judge requested removal from the bail roster.
Last year, Justice Pardiwala’s Bench had also directed that another Allahabad High Court judge be withdrawn from the criminal roster.
However, the Bench later recalled that order at the request of the Chief Justice of India.
