The Supreme Court has clarified that seriousness of charges alone cannot be a factor to deny bail to undertrials nor can courts impose “freakish” bail conditions.
A Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan ordered Sheikh Javed Iqbal, a man awaiting trial under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) for nine years, to be released on bail, in yet another back-to-back decision which upheld the right of an individual’s personal liberty over the state’s claim that bail should not be made easy when serious crimes were involved.
“Bail cannot be denied only on the ground that the charges are very serious though there is no end in sight for the trial to conclude… Seriousness of charges would have to be balanced with other facts like the period of custody suffered and the likely period within which the trial can be expected to be completed,” the Bench held.
An undertrial has a fundamental right to speedy trial, the court said.
“If the alleged offence is a serious one, all the more necessary for the prosecution to ensure that the trial is concluded expeditiously,” the judgment reasoned.
The man was arrested near the Indo-Nepal border in February 2015 allegedly with fake Indian currency notes amounting to over ₹23 lakh. He has been behind bars since then. The man appealed to the Supreme Court after the Allahabad High Court denied him bail. Justice Bhuyan noted that the statements of only two witnesses had been recorded in all these years.
Opinion | How the UAPA is wrecking lives
“A reasonable view can be taken that the trial is likely to take a considerable time,” the July 18 verdict noted.
In a similar decision on July 3, the same Bench had held that the state should not oppose bail if it had no intention or was devoid of the ability to hold a speedy trial. This order was based on an appeal filed by Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh against a Bombay High Court decision refusing him bail in a UAPA case.
“Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime,” the Bench had laid down.
Again, on July 8, the court gave relief to Frank Vitus, a foreign undertrial, who was burdened by the Delhi High Court to share his Google Maps PIN with the Narcotics Control Bureau officer probing the case.
The top court struck down the bail condition as a violation of the privacy of the undertrial.
“Courts cannot impose freakish conditions while granting bail. Conditions of bail cannot be arbitrary and fanciful… While imposing bail conditions, the constitutional rights of an accused ordered to be released on bail can be curtailed only to the minimum extent required, a Bench headed by Justices A.S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan had held.
