The Supreme Court cites prolonged detention, slow trial progress, and suspended sentences in connected cases as reasons for granting bail.
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has granted bail to Mohd. Saquib Ansari, who has been detained for almost 12 years under serious charges, including those under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), the Explosive Substances Act, and the Arms Act. The decision came after the Court considered the prolonged period of incarceration and the sluggish pace of the trial proceedings.
The petitioners, Mohd. Saquib Ansari and Waqar Azhar, were arrested in connection with FIR No. 54 of 2011 registered at Police Station Special Cell, New Delhi. They faced accusations under multiple statutory provisions, including Sections 471, 489B, 489C, and 120B of the IPC; Sections 17, 18, 18A, 18B, 19, and 20 of the UAPA; and Sections 3, 4, and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, among others. Despite the severity of the charges, the Supreme Court found that the petitioners' continued detention violated their fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The High Court of Rajasthan had previously suspended the sentences of the petitioners in related cases, and they had been granted bail in other FIRs, notably FIR No. 113/2014 registered at PS Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur. The trial for the 2011 FIR has seen minimal progress, with only two witnesses examined since January 2025. The Supreme Court highlighted that this stagnation contributed to the infringement of the petitioners' rights.
Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, who presided over the case, emphasized that the decision to grant bail should not be interpreted as an assessment of the case's merits. The Court directed the petitioners to be released on bail subject to conditions imposed by the trial court and maintained that the prosecution could seek further orders if the petitioners failed to cooperate with the trial or misused their liberty.
This judgment underscores the judiciary's commitment to uphold the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution, especially in cases where accused individuals endure prolonged detention without significant trial progress.
Bottom Line:
Bail granted to petitioners accused of serious offences under IPC, UAPA, Explosive Substances Act, and Arms Act, considering prolonged incarceration of 12 years, slow progress of trial, and suspension of sentences in connected cases.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 471, 489B, 489C, 120B of IPC, Sections 17, 18, 18A, 18B, 19, 20 of UAPA, Explosive Substances Act, Arms Act, Article 21 of the Constitution of India
Mohd. Saquib Ansari v. State NCT of Delhi, (SC) : Law Finder Doc id # 2950089
