Can't Keep Accused In Jail Indefinitely; Witnesses Not Being Produced In Trial Courts In Heinous Cases: Allahabad HC Seeks UP DGP Affidavit

The Court emphasised that a person cannot be detained for an indefinite period if the prosecution is not making sincere efforts to produce the prosecution witnesses before the trial Court.

A bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh also observed that many such matters frequently come to the Court where the prosecution does not produce the prosecution witnesses on time, even in heinous matters.

The Court further noted that in several such cases, the Supreme Court granted bail to accused who were long incarcerated, and the prosecution was not making sincere efforts to conclude their trial irrespective of the gravity of an offence, which is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

In view of this, the Court also called for the personal affidavit of the Director General of Police, UP, explaining why the prosecution is not producing the prosecution witnesses before the trial Courts even in heinous matters.

The Court has also sought to know what steps he has taken, as head of the police department in the State of Uttar Pradesh, to ensure the production of prosecution witnesses on the dates fixed before the trial Courts.

The court further directed that if he has fixed the responsibility of the erring official/person concerned in any matter, the details of the same shall also be brought on record through his affidavit.

The Court was essentially dealing with the fourth bail application of an accused, who has been in jail since February 2017. He moved the instant bail plea mainly on the ground of long detention.

Before the Court, his counsel argued that his trial had not been concluded despite being in jail since February 13, 2017.

It was also pointed out that in the last more than seven and a half years, the prosecution has produced only three prosecution witnesses before the trial Court, which amounts to a violation of the Supreme Court's guidelines in this regard.

Under the facts of the case, before passing a final order, the Court found it appropriate to ask the concerned Presiding Officer to report on the present status of the applicant's trial.

The Court added that the report shall also indicate in detail the case proceedings, mentioning why the trial has not yet been concluded and who is responsible for the delay in the trial of the accused applicant.

In view of this, the Court has now posted the matter for October 17. In the meantime, the DGP has been asked to file his affidavit as aforesaid.

Case title - Manoj vs. State of U.P.