It added that the prosecution cannot rely only on the seriousness of charges, as gravity alone cannot justify prolonged incarceration without meaningful progress in trial. The court said it is “unfortunate and a matter of extreme concern” that an undertrial remains in custody for such a long period, undermining the justice system and rendering the presumption of innocence meaningless. It held that the petitioner’s fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 has been “grossly and inexcusably violated,” and said the trial court failed to discharge its statutory obligations. The court added that even if the accused did not fully cooperate at certain stages, that does not absolve the court of its primary duty to ensure a speedy and efficient trial.Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the trial is before the Magistrate’s Court and even upon conviction the maximum sentence would not exceed seven years. The petitioner has already spent about six years and four months in custody since Sept 20, 2019. The defence argued that the delay is solely attributable to the prosecution and further custody would serve no fruitful purpose. It was also submitted that co-accused have already been granted bail by a co-ordinate bench of the High Court, and one co-accused has been granted bail by the Supreme Court.
