Supreme Court Rejects Bail on Grounds of Trial Delay in UAPA Case

The Supreme Court ruled that prolonged trial delays are not automatically valid grounds for bail in cases under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). This ruling came as the Court denied bail to activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, emphasizing the need for detailed judicial scrutiny in such matters.

The Supreme Court on Monday asserted that delays in trials should not automatically grant bail for severe offences under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). This decision came while denying the bail pleas of activists Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, who are implicated in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case.

According to a bench comprising Justices Aravind Kumar and N V Anjaria, a simple invocation of delayed incarceration does not suffice for bail when dealing with serious offences under special enactments. The Court emphasized the significance of a proportional, contextual assessment of all legally relevant factors, including the gravity of accusations and the extent of incarceration.

The bench clarified that considerations extend beyond the time of incarceration to include the nature of allegations implicating national security and the personal liberties guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution, ultimately rejecting the petitioners' reference to the K A Najeeb case as precedent.

(With inputs from agencies.)