New Delhi: A bench of the Supreme Court is examining the possibility of granting bail to people jailed in long-pending criminal appeals, Bar and Bench has reported.
“We want to lay down some norms only on the ground that appeals have not been heard for years. People can’t be in custody for this long,” a bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy said.
The apex court has issued notice to the Allahabad high court on the matter and noted in its order that it expects the Uttar Pradesh government to take proactive steps even before the next hearing date in situations where people are in jail for prolonged periods without bail.
Uttar Pradesh additional advocate general Garima Prashad’s submission to the bench, that those who remain in jail for long without bail are usually those who do not have financial means also reflected the inequality of the incarceration process.
Also read: A List of Activists, Scholars and Scribes Whose Personal Liberty Remains at Judiciary’s Mercy
The Uttar Pradesh government has, in a note, delineated broad criteria while considering bail pleas: total period of imprisonment and for how long their criminal appeal has been pending. Within the scope of these two, the Uttar Pradesh government has also suggested that the seriousness of the crime, the person’s past conduct and criminal history and deliberate delays in appeal pursuing be taken into account. The convict’s personal appearance before the high court, which should be the court she first approaches, was also mentioned as an additional condition.
Several commentators have upheld, at various times, the case for bails as a norm and the necessity to view incarceration only as an exception. NALSAR V-C Faizan Mustafa had written on The Wire, how punishing bail orders affected the legal system, citing examples in cases where judges had sought to offer comments on the case and its merits instead of prioritising the argument for or against bail.
Retired Supreme Court judge Justice Madan B. Lokur had written as part of a tw0-part analysis on The Wire, that lack of accountability over cases which drag on without offering bail is often a leading factor for the perpetuation of such a tradition.
Justice Lokur wrote:
“Six men were held not guilty by the Rajasthan high court in the 1996 Samletti blast case, after they spent 23 years in jail without bail or parole. Their lawyer was quoted as saying: “They were named in multiple cases without any basis. They have been acquitted in all the cases — but after 23 years.” Again, no one is accountable.”
The Calcutta high court earlier this year ordered the release of a Nepali citizen who has been incarcerated for over 40 years in a correctional home as an undertrial prisoner in connection with a murder case.