Recently, the Supreme Court came down strongly on prolonged undertrial detention, calling out a “shocking” denial of bail and reaffirming that constitutional rights cannot be eclipsed by procedural delays.
The Petitioner had been in judicial custody since March 2017 in connection with serious offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120-B and 302 IPC. After investigation, a chargesheet was filed and the matter proceeded as a sessions case, yet the trial remained pending for years. Despite nearly nine years of incarceration as an undertrial, the High Court rejected his plea for regular bail.
The counsel for the Petitioner argued that such prolonged incarceration without conclusion of trial amounted to a violation of his fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution. The counsel contended that continued detention, despite no fault attributable to him in delaying proceedings, was unjust and oppressive.
On the other hand, the High Court relied on a prior Supreme Court ruling to hold that once trial has commenced, bail should ordinarily not be granted and discrepancies in evidence should not be considered at that stage.
The Supreme Court strongly criticized the High Court’s reasoning, observing that it had misapplied precedent and ignored the core issue of prolonged detention. The Court remarked that “It appears that the High Court has not been able to understand the true purport and ratio of the decision… What more was required for the High Court to consider the plea of the petitioner for bail, keeping his right of speedy trial in mind as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution.”
Emphasising constitutional protections, the Court further stated 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 bench termed the situation a “gross case” of violation of fundamental rights and found it unnecessary to even await the State’s response.
Allowing the Special Leave Petition, the Supreme Court directed that the Petitioner be released on bail forthwith, subject to conditions imposed by the trial court. The Court highlighted that indefinite incarceration of an undertrial, regardless of the seriousness of charges, cannot be justified when the right to speedy trial is clearly infringed.
Case Title: Petitioner v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Case No.: Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 7416/2026
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Shwetank Sailakwal, AOR; Mr. Mayank Suryan, Adv.; Ms. Abhinanda Bhuyan, Adv.; Mr. Alok Mishra, Adv.
Advocate for the Respondent: Not Mentioned
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
