Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Accused in 2011 Mumbai Bomb Blast Case Citing Prolonged Incarceration

Over 13 Years Without Trial Leads to Bail for Kafeel Ahmed Mohd Ayub Amidst Pending Examination of 233 Witnesses

In a significant legal development, the Bombay High Court has granted bail to Kafeel Ahmed Mohd Ayub, an accused in the infamous 2011 Mumbai bomb blasts, who has been incarcerated for over 13 and a half years without trial. The decision came after considering the prolonged detention and the slim likelihood of the trial concluding anytime soon due to the pending examination of 233 witnesses.

A bench comprising Justices A.S. Gadkari and Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale addressed the appeal filed by Ayub against an earlier order by the Additional Sessions Judge & Special Judge under MCOC/NIA/POTA Act, which had rejected his bail application. The court underscored the constitutional right to a speedy trial as enshrined in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, observing that the delay constituted a significant breach of this right.

The case, which involves multiple charges under stringent anti-terror laws, has been progressing slowly, with only 167 out of 700 witnesses examined over the past four and a half years. The prosecution had earlier stated its intent to examine 400 witnesses, highlighting the complexity and scale of the trial.

Citing the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb, the High Court noted that statutory restrictions should not impede constitutional courts from granting bail when prolonged incarceration violates fundamental rights. The court emphasized balancing legislative policies with constitutional mandates, especially when trial completion is unlikely in a reasonable timeframe.

The bail comes with stringent conditions, including regular reporting to the Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS), surrendering of the passport, and prohibitions against tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The court also mandated Ayub to provide a personal bond and solvent local sureties, reinforcing the seriousness of the charges while ensuring compliance with bail conditions.

The prosecution's argument, which highlighted the gravity of the charges and the potential threat to societal harmony, was acknowledged by the court. However, it was deemed insufficient to justify continued detention without trial progress, especially given Ayub's age and health considerations.

This ruling reinforces the judiciary's role in upholding constitutional rights, even in cases involving national security, by ensuring that justice is not only done but seen to be done within a reasonable timeframe.

Statutory provision(s): National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 Section 21(4), Constitution of India, 1950 Article 21, Code of Criminal Procedure Section 439, MCOC Act Section 18, UAPA Section 43-D(5).

Kafeel Ahmed Mohd Ayub v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2804443