The Delhi High Court has ruled that the right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution must take precedence over the strict conditions for bail under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA). The Court emphasized that prolonged incarceration, even under stringent laws, cannot override an individual's fundamental rights.
Justice Amit Mahajan, while deciding the case, stated:
“Various courts have recognized that prolonged incarceration undermines the right to life and liberty, as has been guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and therefore, conditional liberty must take precedence over the statutory restrictions under Section 21 of MCOCA and override the bar therein.”
Read also:- Sanction Not Needed Under S.197 CrPC For Insulting SC Member Or Forging Records: Kerala High Court
The case involved one Rajesh Kumar alias Raje, who was arrested in 2018 under Sections 3 and 4 of MCOCA, following a raid by the Special Cell where 3 kg of heroin was seized. The accused was alleged to be associated with a notorious syndicate involved in drug trafficking.
The counsel for Rajesh Kumar argued that he was merely a driver for the co-accused and had no knowledge of the contraband found in the vehicle. They further submitted that there was an undue delay in the trial, with the accused already having spent over six years in custody.
The Special Public Prosecutor opposed the bail, citing the serious nature of the allegations and suggesting that the trial be expedited instead.
However, the Court noted that only 11 out of 100 prosecution witnesses had been examined, and the trial's completion seemed unlikely in the near future.
The Court stated:
“Speedy trial in such a case does not seem to be a possibility and the trial is likely going to take a long time to conclude.”
Considering the prolonged delay and the fact that the accused had already been in custody longer than the minimum sentence of five years for the alleged offence, the Court granted bail to Rajesh Kumar. It highlighted that the accused’s conduct while on interim bail was satisfactory, and he had not misused his liberty.
The Court made it clear that the observations made in the bail order were specifically for deciding the bail application and should not impact the trial's outcome. It stated:
“It is clarified that any observations made in the present order are for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and should not influence the outcome of the Trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.”
Read also:- Kerala High Court Orders Passport Renewal Despite Interpol Red Corner Notice
The judgment reiterates that even in cases involving serious offences, the fundamental right to life and liberty cannot be ignored due to prolonged judicial delays.
Counsel for Applicant: Mr. Akshay Bhandari, Mr. Anmol Sachdeva, Mr. Kushal Kumar, Ms. Meghna Saroa & Mr. Janak Raj Ambawat, Advs
Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Akhand Pratap Singh, SC with Ms. Samridhi Dobhal, Mr. Krishna Mohan Chandel & Mr. Hrithik Maurya, Advs
Title: RAJESH KUMAR ALIAS RAJE v. STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI
