A bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Sandeep Mehta made this observation
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court has said that Article 21 is the soul of the Constitution because the liberty of a citizen is paramount and if the High Court does not decide the matters related to it expeditiously, the person will be deprived of this valuable right.
A bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta made the remarks after noting that the Bombay High Court had granted bail to Amol Vittal Vahile, the main accused in the murder of a councilor in Maharashtra, following the apex court’s order in January . 29.
Thus, it is clear that before the order is passed by this court on January 29, 2024, the High Court, instead of deciding the application for bail on merits, has considered it one way or the other, the bench said in its recent order. Was rejected on that basis.
“It is needless to say that Article 21 of the Constitution of India is the soul of the Constitution because the liberty of a citizen is paramount. Not taking a decision quickly on a matter relating to the liberty of a citizen and postponing the matter to some other ground is The party will be deprived of their precious right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” it said.
The bench said that it has come across many cases in the Bombay High Court where bail and anticipatory bail applications are not being decided expeditiously.
Referring to one such case, the bench said that the anticipatory bail application in this case was not decided for more than four years.
“We have come across several cases in which the judge is not deciding the case on merits, but is instead looking for an excuse to throw out the case on different grounds. Therefore, we appeal to the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court Request that they convey our request to all.The judge exercises criminal jurisdiction to decide the matter relating to bail/anticipatory bail as expeditiously as possible,” the bench said.
It asked the Registrar (Judicial) of the Supreme Court to communicate this order to the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court, who will place it before the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court.
On January 29, the bench said the high court had asked Vahile to approach the trial court for regular bail on March 30, 2023, even though it had noted that he had been in jail for more than seven years .
The apex court had said, “When the petitioner applied for bail on merits and also on the ground that he had been in jail for seven and a half years, the High Court allowed him to file an application only for bail. Gave.” Before the Trial Court/Sessions Court and not to decide on the merits the prayer for bail would, in our view, amount to non-exercise of the jurisdiction vested in it.” The bench had said that at the time the single judge passed the order Vahile had been in jail for seven and a half years at that time and has been in custody for more than eight years so far. The High Court decided to hear the case on merits instead of asking the petitioner to take another round of litigation. Should have been decided on that basis, he had said.
The top court had said that the approach of the High Court is not in keeping with the sanctity given to individual liberty in the series of judgments.
He then asked the High Court to take a fresh decision on Vahile’s bail in view of the fact that he has spent almost eight years in jail.
Vahile is the main accused in the murder of Maharashtra’s Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation councilor Avinash Tekawade.
The police had claimed that Vahile bore a grudge against Tekawade due to professional rivalry and had murdered him along with others on 3 September 2015. He was arrested on 4 September.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
