The Supreme Court’s sweeping instructions laying down a definite timeline for a decision on bail cases and pronouncing of reserved judgments has the potential to transform bail jurisprudence, but only if it is accompanied by stringent monitoring and associated shifts in judicial mindsets. Last week, a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi issued binding directions to all high courts, mandating that bail applications be decided on the same day or, at the latest, within
The Supreme Court’s sweeping instructions laying down a definite timeline for a decision on bail cases and pronouncing of reserved judgments has the potential to transform bail jurisprudence, but only if it is accompanied by stringent monitoring and associated shifts in judicial mindsets. Last week, a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and justice Joymalya Bagchi issued binding directions to all high courts, mandating that bail applications be decided on the same day or, at the latest, within 24 hours of hearing, while also fixing a strict three-month outer limit for pronouncement of reserved judgments. The apex court invoked its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to frame a nationwide framework governing timelines, transparency and accountability in judicial functioning, holding this had become necessary “for complete justice to the parties”.
The decision comes against the backdrop of rising pretrial detention cases that are clogging India’s prison systems amid complaints of judicial delays, especially in cases involving political causes or anti-terror laws. The top court has rightly underlined the importance of personal liberty promised by the Constitution. But the implementation of such timelines will be key, and monitoring has to be transparent and rigorous. The top court should consider extending the diktat to the district judiciary, where the majority of bail cases of ordinary people are decided, and setting up a dashboard to track the progress of such cases. This newspaper has repeatedly said that even in cases involving serious charges, delays and vacillation by the prosecution cannot replace due process. To change the paradigm of personal liberty, strict implementation of the timelines will need to be complemented by a structural shift in bail jurisprudence that doesn’t let the process become the punishment .
One Subscription.
Get 360° coverage—from daily headlines
to 100 year archives.
Archives
HT App & Website