Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Accused In jail

(Querist) 21 June 2009 This query is : Resolved 
Accused is in jail since long i.e. upto the minimum sentence prescribed by the law
without trial, under the circumstances can the Court release him on bail? and is the prosecution required to be heard?
A V Vishal (Expert) 22 June 2009
Right to speedy trial is a fundamental right of a prisoner under article 21 of the Constitution. It ensures just, fair and reasonable procedure. The fact that a speedy trial is also in public interest or that it serves the social interest also, does not make it any the less right of accused. It is in the interest of all concerned that the guilt or innocence of the accused is determined as quickly as possible in the circumstances.

In the case of Hussainara Khatoon(I) v. State of Bihar , a shocking state of affairs in regard to the administration of justice came forward. An alarmingly large number of men and women, including children are behind prison bars for years awaiting trial in the court of law. The offences with which some of them were charged were trivial, which, even if proved would not warrant punishment for more than a few months, perhaps a year or two, and yet these unfortunate forgotten specimens of humanity were in jail, deprived of their freedom, for periods ranging from three to ten years without as much as their trial having commenced. The Hon’ble Supreme Court expressed its concerned and said that:

What faith can these lost souls have in the judicial system which denies them a bare trial for so many years and keeps them behind the bars not because they are guilty; but because they are too poor to afford bail and the courts have no time to try them.
One reason why our legal and judicial system continually denies justice to the poor by keeping them for long years in pretrial detention is our highly unsatisfactory bail system. This system of bail operates very harshly against the poor and it is only the non-poor who are able to take advantage of it by getting themselves released on bail. The poor find it difficult to furnish bail even without sureties because very often the amount of bail fixed by the courts is so unrealistically excessive that in a majority of cases the poor are unable to satisfy the police or the magistrate about their solvency for the amount of the bail and where the bail is with sureties as is usually the case, it becomes an almost impossible task for the poor to find persons sufficiently solvent to stand as sureties.

In Hussainara Khatoon (II) v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar , the Court while dealing with the cases of undertrials who had suffered long incarceration held that a procedure which keeps such large number of people behind bars without trial so long cannot possibly be regarded as reasonable, just or fair so as to be in conformity with the requirement of Article 21.

In Mathew Areeparmtil and other v. State of Bihar and other , a large number of people were languishing in jails without trial for petty offences. Directions were issued to release those persons. Further the court ordered that the cases which involve tribal accused concerning imprisonment of more than 7 yrs. should be released on execution of a personal bond. In the case where trial has started accused should be released on bail on execution of a personal bond. In case where no proceedings at all have taken place in regard to the accused within three yrs., from the date of the lodging of FIR, the accused should be released forthwith under S.169 Cr. P.C. if there are cases in which neither charge-sheet have been submitted nor investigation has been completed during the last three years, the accused should be released forthwith subject to reinvestigation to the said cases on the fresh facts and they should not be arrested with out the permission of the magistrate.

In the case of Raj Deo Sharma v. The State of Bihar , the question before the court was whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the prosecution against the petitioner is to be quashed on the ground of delay in the conduct of trial. The petitioner has never suffered incarceration. His application for bail was ordered on the day he appeared before the Court and presented the same. Allowing the appeal Supreme Court gave the following di
N.K.Assumi (Expert) 22 June 2009
Why not ask the court to conduct camp court inside the jail and those deserving undertrials prisoners be released from jail?
deepak kumar (Expert) 22 June 2009
see if provisions of section 436-A CrPC applies to his case.
Swami Sadashiva Brahmendra Sar (Expert) 22 June 2009
He is entitled to bail.
Uma parameswaran (Expert) 23 June 2009
She /he needs to be acquitted instantly.


You need to be the querist or approved LAWyersclub expert to take part in this query .


Click here to login now



Similar Resolved Queries :