Under-trial accused cannot be jailed for indefinite period: Bombay HC

A person cannot be incarcerated for an indefinite period of time pending trial as it is violative of the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of India, the Bombay High Court said while granting bail to a man, accused in a double murder case.

On September 26, a single bench of Justice Bharati Dangre granted bail to Akash Satish Chandalia, who had been detained by the Lonavala police in the Pune area in September 2015 on suspicion of two counts of murder and one count of conspiracy. The court in its order said a balancing act has to be struck between the gravity and seriousness of the charges, which the accused is facing, and the long time taken for conclusion of trial.

The seriousness of an offence and its heinous nature may be one aspect, which deserves a consideration while exercising the discretion to release an accused on bail, but at the same time, the factor of long incarceration of an accused as under-trial prisoner also deserve its due weightage, the court said.

A person cannot be detained indefinitely while awaiting trial because doing so clearly breaches a fundamental constitutional right and has frequently been cited as a reason to exercise the discretion to release an accused, the statement continued. The court observed in its judgement that despite orders to finish the trial quickly, none have been followed, and in such a situation, there is no choice but to release an accused person on bond.

A balancing act, therefore, will have to be struck between the gravity and seriousness of the charges, which the applicant has to face and the long time consumed for conclusion of the trial, as the question of great significance, which all the stakeholders in the system must ponder is, after this long period of trial, if the accused is acquitted, how shall the system compensate him, the order said. Access to justice and speedy trial has been well-recognised as a hallmark of liberty guaranteed in Part III of the Constitution and when a timely trial is not possible, the accused cannot be made to suffer further incarceration, the court said.