Judiciary Double Standards: A Tale of Bail and Parole

Opposition leaders criticize the Supreme Court for denying bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, imprisoned over five years without trial under the UAPA, while rape convict Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh enjoys repeated paroles. This reflects concerns about selective justice and prolonged pre-trial detentions, challenging the 'bail as rule' principle.

Opposition leaders have condemned the Supreme Court's decision to deny bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, who have already spent over five years in jail under the UAPA without trial. Their incarceration contrasts sharply with rape convict Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh's frequent parole grants.

In a social media post, Communist Party of India (Marxist) MP John Brittas highlighted the dichotomy in the judicial system. While Khalid languishes without trial, Singh enjoys his 15th parole since conviction in 2017, raising questions about the principles of justice and the legal notion that bail should be the rule.

With the Supreme Court's recent decision, the political opposition demands the release of political prisoners and criticizes the misuse of the UAPA to stifle dissent. The denial of bail to Khalid and Imam amplifies concerns about selective justice and the erosion of constitutional rights to a fair and speedy trial.

(With inputs from agencies.)