SC criticises its January verdict denying bail to Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam

In a significant development that underscores the principle of liberty, the Supreme Court has openly criticized its own prior ruling which denied bail to former JNU student Umar Khalid and activist Sharjeel Imam in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. The apex court's bench, comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, emphatically reiterated the fundamental legal tenet that "bail is the rule and jail is an exception." This principle, the court stressed, holds true even in cases prosecuted under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), a law often criticized for its restrictive bail provisions.

The court's strong reservations were voiced while granting bail to Syed Iftikhar Andrabi in a separate narco-terror case. Justice Bhuyan, reading from the judgment, highlighted that the January 5 verdict had failed to properly adhere to the binding precedents set by a larger bench in the Union of India Vs KA Najeeb case (2021). That landmark ruling had established that prolonged detention and significant delays in trial proceedings could indeed outweigh statutory restrictions on granting bail under Section 43D(5) of the UAPA.

“

Bail is not an empty statutory slogan. It is a constitutional principle flowing from Article 21, and the presumption of innocence is the cornerstone of any civilised society governed by the rule of law.

This judicial introspection serves as a powerful reminder of the judiciary's role in upholding constitutional rights. The court's observation that "bail is not an empty statutory slogan" but a "constitutional principle flowing from Article 21" resonates deeply within India's legal framework. It reaffirms that the presumption of innocence remains a cornerstone of a civilized society governed by the rule of law. The judiciary's willingness to review and, if necessary, correct its own course, particularly in matters concerning individual liberty and prolonged pre-trial detention, is a vital aspect of judicial accountability and fairness.

“

Even under UAPA, bail is the rule and jail an exception. Bail can only be denied in a particular case depending on the facts of that particular case.