SUPREME COURT SEEKS STATUS REPORT ON DELAYED CRIMINAL TRIALS IN J&K; FLAGS SLOW WITNESS EXAMINATION:

The Supreme Court on Monday (February 3) strongly criticised the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir for prolonged delays in a criminal trial that resulted in an undertrial prisoner remaining in custody for nearly seven years. Taking serious note of the failure of the prosecuting agency to conduct the trial efficiently, the Court granted bail to the accused and sought accountability from the UT administration.

A Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan was hearing a bail plea filed by an undertrial accused of murder, who had been incarcerated since October 2018. The Bench observed that despite the passage of seven years, the prosecution had managed to examine only seven witnesses, reflecting a glaring violation of the accused’s fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The matter had earlier come up for hearing on January 29, when the Bench had sought a detailed explanation from the trial court and the prosecuting agency regarding the inordinate delay. On Monday, the Court examined the report submitted by the trial court and described it as deeply unsatisfactory, highlighting serious lapses on the part of the prosecution.

At the outset, counsel appearing for the UT of Jammu and Kashmir informed the Court that he was unable to trace all the orders passed in the case. The Bench noted that as many as 86 orders had been passed, underscoring the lack of preparedness and diligence on the part of the State.

The Court expressed concern that the accused had remained behind bars for seven years as an undertrial without meaningful progress in the trial. It noted that while the prosecution cited factors such as the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent proceedings initiated by the widow of the deceased as reasons for delay, these explanations failed to justify the prolonged stagnation. The Bench observed that trials across the country had not entirely ceased during the pandemic and that institutional delays could not be used to indefinitely curtail personal liberty.

The factual background of the case revealed that the incident allegedly occurred on October 4, 2018, following which the accused was arrested. A chargesheet was filed, naming two eyewitnesses. Charges were framed by the trial court in February 2019, and the prosecution was directed to lead evidence. While a few witnesses were examined in the initial stages, the widow of the deceased later sought further investigation. Though the trial court declined the request, the High Court subsequently ordered a de novo investigation, leading to the filing of a supplementary chargesheet.

The trial thereafter suffered further setbacks, including disruptions during the pandemic. However, the Supreme Court noted that even after 2022, there had been virtually no progress. The trial court’s report indicated that in more than 82 hearings, not a single witness had been examined, despite the prosecution proposing to examine 17 more witnesses.

The Bench observed that the prosecution owed a clear explanation for the gross and inordinate delay and indicated that it would take a strict view of the matter. In this context, the Court directed the Home Secretary of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir to file a detailed response within four weeks and to appear virtually on the next date of hearing.

Significantly, the Court also took note of submissions indicating that the present case was not an isolated instance. It was informed that several undertrial prisoners in the UT had been in custody for over five to ten years with trials still pending. Finding this deeply concerning, the Court directed the Home Secretary to place on record details of all pending criminal cases in which accused persons have remained in custody for more than five years. Pending further consideration, the Court ordered the release of the petitioner on bail, subject to conditions to be determined by the trial court.