Court Cannot Compel Accused To Languish In Jail Without Progress In Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Reiterates
In a significant ruling, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, presided by Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, addressed the critical issue of whether an accused can be detained in jail without any progress in their trial. The ruling came in response to the Misc. Criminal Case No. 27895 of 2024 filed by Suma Bhaskaran (Suma Anil) against the Union of India.Suma Bhaskaran was arrested on...
In a significant ruling, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, presided by Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, addressed the critical issue of whether an accused can be detained in jail without any progress in their trial. The ruling came in response to the Misc. Criminal Case No. 27895 of 2024 filed by Suma Bhaskaran (Suma Anil) against the Union of India.
Suma Bhaskaran was arrested on May 19, 2024, in connection with Crime No.RC2162024A0004/2024, registered at CBI AC-I, New Delhi, under various sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The applicant sought bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.). Senior Advocate Shri Manish Datt, along with Advocate Shri Ishan Tignath, represented the applicant, while Advocate Shri Vikram Singh represented the respondent/CBI.
The applicant's counsel argued that despite the filing of a charge sheet, its copy had not been provided to any of the accused, including Suma Bhaskaran. The Investigating Officer, Shri Som, contended that the charge sheet had not been distributed because the sanction for prosecution of the public servant involved had not yet been received. Consequently, the court could not take cognizance of the charge sheet, and the trial could not proceed.
The prosecution maintained that without the necessary sanction for prosecution, the court could not move forward against the public servants, which in turn stalled proceedings against private individuals like the applicant.
Justice Ahluwalia addressed the core question: Can the accused be kept in jail without any trial progress?
He emphasized that regardless of the timing of the charge sheet filing relative to the bail application, the crux of the matter was the lack of trial progression.
The Investigating Officer's additional contention that the bail application was invalid due to its timing was firmly rejected by the court. Justice Ahluwalia stressed that the primary issue was the applicant's extended detention without trial progress.
Emphasising on the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, the court noted that the prosecution's acknowledgment of legal hurdles preventing trial progression necessitated a re-evaluation of the applicant's detention. Justice Ahluwalia referenced the Supreme Court's judgment in Aparna Bhat & Ors. vs. State of M.P. (Criminal Appeal No.329/2021, dated March 18, 2021), which highlights the importance of not unduly detaining individuals without substantial legal proceedings.
Justice Ahluwalia stated that,“It is the stand of the prosecution itself that for the time being the trial cannot proceed because of legal hurdles. If that is so, then no one can be allowed to languish in jail because unless and until a person is held to be guilty he has to be presumed innocent.”
The court concluded that in the absence of trial progress, it would be unjust to continue detaining the applicant. Therefore, the application for bail was granted. Suma Bhaskaran was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 with one surety of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Committal Court.
The court specified that this bail order would remain effective until the end of the trial unless there was a bail jump, in which case the trial court could take the applicant back into custody.
Case title: Smt. Suma Bhaskaran (Suma Anil)Versus Union Of India
Case No: M.Cr.C.No.27895 of 2024
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP) 145