Four sensitive cases listed before this Supreme Court bench were withdrawn

One bench of the Supreme Court has lately seen a number of politically sensitive cases being listed before it, much to the apparent chagrin of petitioners seeking bail..The recent spate of withdrawals of important cases listed before a Bench of Justices Bela Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal has led one to question the possible reasons behind the legal strategy..But first, we take a look at four such cases..Umar Khalid.In February this year, Khalid, an undertrial in a Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) case linked to the Delhi Riots of 2020, withdrew his bail application from the Supreme Court.Appearing before the Bench of Justices Trivedi and Mithal, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal sought permission to withdraw the bail plea. Sibal referred to “changed circumstances” and said he would seek relief in the trial court. The Court permitted him to withdraw the plea.Justice Trivedi had earlier pointed out that the hearing of and decision in the case should not be delayed any further, and that it was a matter concerning liberty.In the nine months since Khalid filed a special leave petition in the Supreme Court, his bail plea was adjourned 14 times. Of these 14 adjournments, at least four were requested by Khalid’s counsel, including one joint request with the Delhi Police. The top court postponed the hearings five times. Additionally, one hearing was deferred because of a logistical issue and another adjournment was sought by the Delhi Police. Justice Pankaj Mithal had observed that an impression should not be created that the Court was unwilling to hear the matter, especially when the adjournment was actually being sought by the lawyers..Hany Babu.Babu, an accused in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence case, withdrew his bail plea from the Supreme Court on May 3, citing a change in circumstances. His counsel had added they would move the High Court afresh for bail. The Bench headed by Justice Trivedi allowed the same..Babu was arrested in July 2020 on charges of being a member of the Communist Party of India (Maoist) and being involved in an alleged conspiracy to attack Prime Minister Narendra Modi.The Bombay High Court rejected his bail plea in September 2023, leading to the appeal before the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court had sought the response of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to the regular bail plea filed by the Delhi University faculty member in January this year..Another bench of the apex court had granted bail to Dalit and women's rights activist Shoma Sen, another accused in the Bhima Koregaon violence case..Manik Bhattacharya.On May 10, All India Trinamool Congress Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) Manik Bhattacharya sought liberty to withdraw his petition challenging the Calcutta High Court's rejection of bail in a money laundering related to cash-for-jobs scam. The Court allowed Bhattacharya to file a fresh plea with any additional documents before the High Court and asked the High Court to consider the matter afresh and expeditiously. Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra sought to place additional documents on record, but Justice Trivedi remarked that "procedurally no new documents could be relied upon before the Supreme Court if they do not form part of the earlier High Court records."Souvik Bhattacharya, the MLA's son, however, had been given bail by the same bench..Salim Malik.Malik, an accused in the Delhi Riots conspiracy case, withdrew his bail plea before the Supreme Court on May 10.The Delhi High Court had on April 22 denied bail to Malik, after noting that he attended meetings where aspects of riot-like violence and burning of the national capital were openly discussed.He was arrested by the Delhi Police on June 25, 2020 and booked under several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as well as provisions of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA).When the matter came up before the Supreme Court, Justice Trivedi observed that she was not convinced on the need to interfere with the orders of the courts below.Malik then proceeded to withdraw his petition..The Bench headed by Justice Bela M Trivedi has been in the news lately for its denial of bail in politically sensitive cases.In November 2023, Justice Trivedi headed the bench that refused to grant bail to Tamil Nadu Minister V Senthil Balaji on medical grounds.While refusing medical bail to Balaji, who was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate, Justice Trivedi had said,"Your sickness doesn't appear to be serious or life-threatening. These days bypass is like appendicitis. I checked on the Google. It says it can be cured.".In March, another bench led by Justice Trivedi had denied bail to Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and former Delhi Minister Satyendar Jain in a money laundering case. The top court had directed Jain to surrender forthwith. The court had also rejected bail plea of co-accused Ankush Jain..Continuing the spree of no bail in politically sensitive matters, a Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna, MM Sundresh and Trivedi had declined to entertain the bail plea of BRS leader K Kavitha, who was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with the Delhi Excise Policy case. The Court said that it couldn't bypass procedure just because she was a politician..These orders rejecting bail were passed in the wake of allegations of the "sudden transfer" of cases from one bench to another.In an open letter addressed to Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave claimed that many cases which were being heard by certain benches were shifted out and listed before other benches in violation of the Supreme Court Rules and the Handbook on Practice and Procedure of the Court, which govern listing of cases.Dave had also raised objections to a Department of Vigilance case suddenly being transferred to a bench of Justices Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma, even though it had been heard "for three dates" by a bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi..A similar objection was made by Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi in Satyendar Jain's bail case. In December 2023, Singhvi sought deferment of the hearing of the case listed before the bench headed by Justice Trivedi, till Justice AS Bopanna returns from leave. “This case was listed before Justice AS Bopanna. He had heard it for 2.5 hours. Now the case is listed before Justice Bela Trivedi,” Singhvi submitted.However, CJI Chandrachud in response said,“I will not control what the judge is doing in the matter listed before her. The judge who has the case will decide. I cannot. I cannot take a call…”.In response to protests against matters being placed before Justice Trivedi, a highly placed source in the Supreme Court had clarified that "any attempt of bench and judge hunting will be thwarted" and that the Supreme Court "cannot be a lawyer-driven court"..One point to be noted is that bail in these cases - filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) and the UAPA - is hard to come by, given the stringent conditions imposed in these statutes. Bail is usually the rule and jail the exception, but these statutes turn that concept on its head. In this context, are the courts to blame for denying accused bail?Whatever the reasons for the recent spate of withdrawals, only time will tell whether this trend will continue or not.