"Only 6 out of 109 witnesses examined so far:" Supreme Court grants bail to UAPA accused in custody for 8 years

The Supreme Court on Monday granted bail to a person accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) after noting that the person has been in custody for almost 8 years and the prosecution has examined only 6 out of the 109 witnesses [Jahir Hak v. State of Rajasthan]..A division bench of Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy also took note of the report submitted by the Session Judge which stated that at least 2 to 3 more years would be required for the completion of the trial."We would think that in the nature of the case against the appellant, the evidence which has already unfolded and above all, the long period of incarceration that the appellant has already undergone, time has arrived when the appellant be enlarged on bail. We bear in mind the fact that the prosecution seeks to examine as many as 109 witnesses of which only 6 witnesses have been fully examined so far," the Court said. .The Court relied on its decision in Union of India v. KA Najeeb, wherein it was observed that even in the case of special legislations like the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 or the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (the NDPS Act), the accused can be released on bail if he has been in jail for extended period of time."Even in the case of special legislations like the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 or the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (“the NDPS Act”) which too have somewhat rigorous conditions for grant of bail, this Court in Paramjit Singh v. State (NCT of Delhi), Babba v. State of Maharashtra and Umarmia v. State of Gujarat enlarged the accused on bail when they had been in jail for an extended period of time with little possibility of early completion of trial. The constitutionality of harsh conditions for bail in such special enactments, has thus been primarily justified on the touchstone of speedy trials to ensure the protection of innocent civilians," the judgment said.The top court was of the view that the conditions of bail under the UAPA has been understood to be less stringent than the provisions contained in the NDPS Act, and since the appellant has been in custody as an undertrial prisoner for a period of nearly 8 years, he is suitable to be released on bail..The Bench, therefore, directed the release of the appellant on bail subject to such conditions as shall be fixed by the trial court..Advocates Mohd Irshad Hanif, Mujahid Ahmed, Rizwan Ahmed, Danish Sher Khan, AR Siddiqui and Mohit Kumar appeared for the appellant.Advocate Pragati Neekhra appeared for the respondent..[Read Order]