ON TUESDAY, THE SUPREME COURT ruled that the right to a speedy trial, flowing from Article 21 of the Constitution, is not eclipsed by the nature of the offence, adding that prolonged incarceration of an undertrial, without commencement or reasonable progress of the trial, cannot be accepted, as it has the effect of converting pretrial detention into a form of punishment.
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe handed down a ruling to this effect while granting bail to one Arvind Dham, accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (‘PMLA’).
Adhering to the rulings of coordinate Benches in Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra (2024) and Manish Sisodia v. Enforcement Directorate (2024), the Bench held that it is well settled that if the State or any prosecuting agency, including the Court concerned, has no wherewithal to provide or protect the fundamental right of an accused to have a speedy trial as enshrined under Article 21, then the State or any other prosecuting agency should not oppose the plea for bail on the ground that the crime committed is serious.
“Article 21 of the Constitution applies irrespective of the nature of the crime”, the Bench said.
